The all things Political topic -In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie

[Amentep]

Previous thread-

Last few posts-

 

5 hours ago, Gromnir said:

fake news. western lies. 

only kinda kidding.

russians know there is better than what they have, but particular the older generation o' russians remember just how bad things can be. for near a decade after 1991, russians were promised how much better things would be. just wait a little bit for free market magic to work.

starve.

freeze. 

putin made things better.

is not complicated or deep or profound.

HA! Good Fun!

 

3 hours ago, Skarpen said:

@Gromnir Bruce is asking about Baltic states: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania not Russia. 

 

3 hours ago, Gromnir said:

and Gromnir were initial responding to shady observations 'bout the ussr.

more specific, the baltic states is having significant russian expat populations, and the expats is curious more pro putin than those current living in russia. also, the baltic state economies were inextricably linked with russia during the dismal post 1991 years. same problems.

the thing is, it is our admitted limited experience (mostly lithuania) that the the baltic governments is hardly pro moscow. as recent as a couple years ago (haven't checked recent) lithuania were calling russia a terrorist state and estonia is always at the forefront o' nations pushing for tougher western sanctions o' russia.

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

[Malcador]

Well, the thread topic is pretty apt this time

[ComradeYellow]

Spoiler

 

Americas "Mordor" is now China, but it targeting China 100% fair?  Are we projecting?

You decide!

Edited April 13, 2021 by ComradeYellow

[Guard Dog]

29 minutes ago, ComradeYellow said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Americas "Mordor" is now China, but it targeting China 100% fair?  Are we projecting?

You decide!

Depends. Do you consider protecting Taiwan from China projecting? Should we even be doing that? I’d say yes because not doing so will invite even more aggression. Indicating absolute willingness to employ total war including the use of nuclear weapons will make maintaining the status quo very attractive I’d think. It certainly kept the peace throughout the Cold War

[Gromnir]

am thinking it is impossible to make people understand what it were like during the height o' the cold war. weren't as if we worried constant 'bout nuclear armageddon, but it were always there. and intellectual we know we ain't much safer today from apocalyptic stoopid than were the case in the 80s or 70s, but such a recognition not change fact it felt different. is difficult/impossible to explain the difference. 

if there is a way to avoid a MAD standoff with china as a way to keep peace, am in favor of it. am not a peace at any cost guy by any stretch o' the imagination, but a return to MAD is not gonna be our notion o' a win scenario.

am knowing gd recent gave kennedy credit for his handling o' the cuban missile crisis, but as we has grown older, we can't help but think the guy who deserves the most credit were khrushchev. keep in mind kennedy had ok'd the bay of pigs fiasco which in part failed 'cause o' a failure to consider daylight savings? serious? bay of pigs were a US supported invasion o' cuba in 1961, and arguable kinda cowardly. so a year later you got the US and CCCP playing chicken with nukes  with cuba at the center o' the conflict and kennedy refused to back down. kennedy intransigence were not a shock. as so many forget, kennedy did not run for the Presidency on a platform o' social conscious reform. #1 issue for kennedy were to build up US military and resist soviet and chinese aggression wherever such were happening 'cross the globe. resist soviet and china were his raison dêtre.

khrushchev and kennedy woulda' ridden out armageddon in their bunkers as the world burned. real courageous. were political suicide to back down, but somebody had to... and that somebody weren't kennedy.

...

ten years ago we woulda' agreed with gd 'bout kennedy courage insofar as the cuban missile crisis. am just not sure anymore. 

HA! Good Fun!

ps am not suggesting kennedy were a coward even if the bay of pigs was chicken sh!t. kennedy proved his mettle during the war.  no need to convince us he were brave. 

 

[ComradeYellow]

Honestly, I'd rather just risk war and knock out the CCP (let Europe mostly deal with R00sha)

Why?  Because an all out war would break us financially and we would lose our Empire, just like the U.K. lost their empire after WW2.

Two birds, one stone.  Remove probably-worse-than-U.S. powers and also remove ourselves.

Then we shall live in an empire free world.

[Guard Dog]

What else could Kennedy do?  Stevens was telling him to do nothing. The absolute worst thing you can do in the face of provocation is nothing. Bobby and All of his people were telling him to invade. Well we know now there were four Soviet submarines in the area with nuclear tip torpedoes and the local ground commander had tactical nuclear weapons with authorization to use them. The invasion would have been a disaster and absolutely would have led to World War III. Kennedy and McNamara wisely chose a third option
 

Once a nuclear weapon has been used there is no more room for cooler heads to prevail. But the moment someone signals they are unwilling to go that far it only invites aggression. Suppose China makes good on its threat and actually invades Taiwan. Would you stand by and let them? I can’t imagine that you would.  Biden and whoever follows him cannot back down. The must indicate a willingness to go all the way all the while looking for a third option 

As far as Kruschev goes, he genuinely believed he could put those missiles in Cuba without the US finding out about it. It was a dangerous and reckless gambit but the Soviets did not comprehend us surveillance capabilities and also didn’t know their submarine radio burst system had been found and that the US could track Soviet subs. This was a mess largely of his own making although the KGB really let him down here because as wanted as their capabilities were they were continually underestimating American capability. He took a step back and he got something in return for doing it. The removal of the US missiles in Turkey. But it’s hard to give him any credit in this scenario when he was the creator of it.

Edited April 13, 2021 by Guard Dog

[Gromnir]

11 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

He took a step back and he got something in return for doing it. The removal of the US missiles in Turkey. But it’s hard to give him any credit in this scenario when he was the creator of it.

again, the US had already invaded cuba in 1961. that detail is kinda important and keeps slipping through the cracks o' your responses.

mcnamara and kennedy's choice only appears wise now 'cause khrushchev backed down. can dress it up however you want, but kennedy and khrushchev opted to play a game o' chicken with many millions o' lives in the balance. the wise choice? 

also, increasing accurate and mirv'd icbms and sub launched nukes made the whole rationale for being enraged by missiles in cuba moot w/i a few years anyways, so in retrospect the whole fiasco were even more stoopid.

btw, no, am not in favor o' ignoring chinese aggression regarding taiwan, but if you genuine think a return to MAD is a good option as 'posed to an admitted terrible choice 'tween a whole lotta horrible options, am genuine a bit saddened. am not advocating a neville chamberlain approach 'cause as we already stated, we ain't a peace at all costs advocate. even so, we recognize just how stoopid and dangerous is MAD and am thinking gd is willful ignoring all the times MAD almost resulted in actual nuclear apocalypse 'cause o' mistakes and bad judgment... narrow avoided.

but again, a few years ago we woulda' been at least marginal agreeing kennedy deserved credit, but am think far too many forget just how much o' a hawk he were and how his policies had created a whole lotta arguable unnecessary additional tension with cuba, china and the cccp. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

 

If anyone is interested these are two really excellent books on the Cuban missile crisis. The first will actually put you on the bridge of the four Soviet submarines and gives the account of their four commanders. As well as on the bridge of the US destroyers that were hunting them. It is a really cool perspective. The second one was written by Robert Kennedy who of course was on EXCOM And was present for absolutely every meeting.

 

Edited April 13, 2021 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

5 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

again, the US had already invaded cuba in 1961. that detail is kinda important and keeps slipping through the cracks o' your responses.

mcnamara and kennedy's choice only appears wise now 'cause khrushchev backed down. can dress it up however you want, but kennedy and khrushchev opted to play a game o' chicken with many millions o' lives in the balance. the wise choice? 

also, increasing accurate and mirv'd icbms and sub launched nukes made the whole rationale for being enraged by missiles in cuba moot w/i a few years anyways, so in retrospect the whole fiasco were even more stoopid.

btw, no, am not in favor o' ignoring chinese aggression regarding taiwan, but if you genuine think a return to MAD is a good option as 'posed to an admitted terrible choice 'tween a whole lotta horrible options, am genuine a bit saddened. am not advocating a neville chamberlain approach 'cause as we already stated, we ain't a peace at all costs advocate. even so, we recognize just how stoopid and dangerous is MAD and am thinking gd is willful ignoring all the times MAD almost resulted in actual nuclear apocalypse 'cause o' mistakes and bad judgment... narrow avoided.

but again, a few years ago we woulda' been at least marginal agreeing kennedy deserved credit, but am think far too many forget just how much o' a hawk he were and how his policies had created a whole lotta arguable unnecessary additional tension with cuba, china and the cccp. 

HA! Good Fun!

The thing tp remember about the Bay of Pigs it was not US troops making the landing. It was Cuban nationals. Yes they were being supported by the United States and it might be a distinction without a difference but it is a distinction. In 1962 the Soviets had eight submarines capable of launching four ICBMs each. None of them had a range of more than 1000 miles. That missile base in Cuba was a very very big deal.  You say we don’t want to return to MAD. Reality we’ve never really left it. If peace with China means selling out Taiwan and abrogating our joint defense agreement with them we will not have peace after that either. That’s only going to invite more Chinese aggression elsewhere. Only now no one will be willing to make agreements with the United States because we cannot be counted on. Ronald Reagan was right about one thing peace can only be achieved through strength. And it’s not enough to have the strength it’s demonstrating the willingness to use it. It sucks because you are correct the life of every human is gambled every time this kind of brinksmanship goes on. This is the world we live in. As homer wrote we men are wretched things.

[Sarex]

Peace for who...

[Guard Dog]

3 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Peace for who...

Everyone. Do you think of China invades Taiwan there is not going to be a mass killing  of Taiwanese? Heck even if they assimilated the island peacefully if it goes anything like Hong Kong people are still going to be disappeared on a regular basis. Maintaining the status quo has to be the best option and it has to be obvious to everyone that it is the best option. The moment a country like China gets in their heads that a war is winnable there’s going to be one.

Edited April 13, 2021 by Guard Dog

[Malcador]

Sort of an odd peace when it's everyone keeping their gun handy.

[Guard Dog]

4 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Sort of an odd peace when it's everyone keeping their gun handy.

There has never been any other kind

[ComradeYellow]

8 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

 Maintaining the status quo has to be the best option and it has to be obvious to everyone that it is the best option. 

Disagree.  The human conscience simply cannot handle "samey" policies forever, especially considering material conditions are greatly different than a several decades ago.

Eventually, something has to give...

[Gromnir]

Just now, Guard Dog said:

The thing tp remember about the Bay of Pigs it was not US troops making the landing. It was Cuban nationals. Yes they were being supported by the United States and it might be a distinction without a difference but it is a distinction.

and cia operatives. don't forget the cia. gd again being selective with the details. so it were a US supported invasion o' cuba by cuban nationals and cia operatives. 

and yeah, in 1962 the range o' missiles were limited and the accuracy were a joke, but recall our statement: 

"also, increasing accurate and mirv'd icbms and sub launched nukes made the whole rationale for being enraged by missiles in cuba moot w/i a few years anyways, so in retrospect the whole fiasco were even more stoopid."

less than a decade and whole rationale is moot. kill millions over what is rendered meaningless in a decade? sure, is no way for kennedy to see into the future, but kennedy's self serving and platform advancing choice looks worse (not better) given a bit o' the 20-20 hindsight.

8 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

 You say we don’t want to return to MAD. Reality we’ve never really left it.

again, preach to the choir. please review. we already stated we ain't marked safer today than back then. is a whole host o' lesser powers who now have the capacity to unleash bio weapons and dirty bombs and whatnot which could have a cascade effect resulting in death o' far too many, but it ain't genuine MAD. am not sure if this is an age thing or not, but for gd there should be less excuse 'cause he does read history. am suspecting he knows better but genuine believes the enhanced possibility o' accidental annihilation and/or world spanning death due to supreme bad judgement is worth the cost. am recalling a post war senate study which quiet recognized near two dozen times the US and soviets were literal moments away from ww3, and reasons were often supreme stoopid-- geese and the moon were actual culprits o' two extreme near misses.  

which is all particular weird as gd expresses lack o' trust for any and all politicians. can't trust any of them to condemn land to build a damn or pass laws to prohibit smoking indoors or make worthy o' a traffic citation to engage in dangerous behavior while driving, but he is ok with the politicians having the requisite judgment and clear headedness to initiate or forestall nuclear armageddon? okie dokie.

HA! Good Fun! 

[Zoraptor]

Biden extends US troop presence in Afghanistan until at least September 11 (from May 1). Some amusing framing going on to try and make it not sound like an extension, and one that could be further prorogued. Practically, matches the announcement from the last week about the US withdrawing all (combat) troops from Iraq, (with no timetable).

8 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Maintaining the status quo has to be the best option and it has to be obvious to everyone that it is the best option. The moment a country like China gets in their heads that a war is winnable there’s going to be one.

It already is winnable, militarily, as the Chinese would take Taiwan if they invaded and they'd hold it permanently once taken. The US won't use nukes to defend Taiwan, and that's what it would take to 'win' against an invasion. An invasion would result in both China and the US destroying each others' economies though, and for that specific situation is the MAD that prevents anything happening yet.

 

[Guard Dog]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

and cia operatives. don't forget the cia. gd again being selective with the details. so it were a US supported invasion o' cuba by cuban nationals and cia operatives. 

and yeah, in 1962 the range o' missiles were limited and the accuracy were a joke, but recall our statement: 

"also, increasing accurate and mirv'd icbms and sub launched nukes made the whole rationale for being enraged by missiles in cuba moot w/i a few years anyways, so in retrospect the whole fiasco were even more stoopid."

less than a decade and whole rationale is moot. kill millions over what is rendered meaningless in a decade? sure, is no way for kennedy to see into the future, but kennedy's self serving and platform advancing choice looks worse (not better) given a bit o' the 20-20 hindsight.

again, preach to the choir. please review. we already stated we ain't marked safer today than back then. is a whole host o' lesser powers who now have the capacity to unleash bio weapons and dirty bombs and whatnot which could have a cascade effect resulting in death o' far too many, but it ain't genuine MAD. am not sure if this is an age thing or not, but for gd there should be less excuse 'cause he does read history. am suspecting he knows better but genuine believes the enhanced possibility o' accidental annihilation and/or world spanning death due to supreme bad judgement is worth the cost. am recalling a post war senate study which quiet recognized near two dozen times the US and soviets were literal moments away from ww3, and reasons were often supreme stoopid-- geese and the moon were actual culprits o' two extreme near misses.  

which is all particular weird as gd expresses lack o' trust for any and all politicians. can't trust any of them to condemn land to build a damn or pass laws to prohibit smoking indoors or make worthy o' a traffic citation to engage in dangerous behavior while driving, but he is ok with the politicians having the requisite judgment and clear headedness to initiate or forestall nuclear armageddon? okie dokie.

HA! Good Fun! 

Have you ever read Von Clausewitz? You should. War is simple. It is the simplest of things. So simple even someone as stupid as a politician can grasp it. Some of the  things you mention and the other things that I frequently object to are a bit more complex. And they are not taught in PoliSci or Law schools. Others are nothing more than petty harassment . Well if you’ve never read Von Clausewitz i’ll summit up for you in one sentence. The moment an aggressor believes a war is winnable the war becomes inevitable. To secure a peace you must prepare for war. If China believes an invasion of Taiwan will lead to a general war with the United States and that such a war is either unwinnable or too costly then it will never happen. It does not need to actually be true. They just have to be made to believe that it is. 
 

One of the big reasons the Cuban missile crisis end the way that it did is because Robert Kennedy told the Soviet ambassador that  if they did not accept  the offered terms  World War III was going to begin on Day 14. Those were not his words obviously but the implication was clear. And Kruschev believed it.

Edited April 13, 2021 by Guard Dog

[Darkpriest]

Sooo a few things. 

If China decides to invade Taiwan, US will be powerless, and won't stop it. Conventional weapons conflict is lost from the get go, and you don't want to reach out for nuclear options. 

 

Such a conflict would be devastating for the world economy, and especially for US and EU, who are heavily reliant on a long global supply chain. China and Russia much less so, as they have been coping with various restrictions and are more resilient to distruptions. It would hurt them, but not in the same magnitude. 

 

The big deterrent is so far, the contract that Chinese gov has with its nation, that they can sustain growth to prosperity and greatness and take back their position at the top. They know that aggression would be met by sudden drop in evonomic activities and more mistrust in their expansion areas of Asia and Africa. They won't do that in near future. They will smoke screen with this threat. 

 

Other han that, overall the typical western ignorance again is visible when dealing with Eastern societies. American leadership is simply too blind and too stupid to understand that something mishmashed in the last 150years is not necessarly superior to a few millenia of continous evolution and traditions. 

We value in the last 50 years individualism veeeery highly, while in the Eastern cultures, it's more about communities/clans/homogenous society. People are more willing to give up some personal freedoms in a trade off for other benefits or feeling that they are building something greater for their future generations, and as long as they see their own situation and quality of life improving. 

In Western cultures we've empowered individualism, as it makes it easier to milk such and run extreme consumerism. It's also easier to manipulate individuals than whole communities

Edited April 13, 2021 by Darkpriest

[Zoraptor]

28 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

Such a conflict would be devastating for the world economy, and especially for US and EU, who are heavily reliant on a long global supply chain. China and Russia much less so, as they have been coping with various restrictions and are more resilient to distruptions. It would hurt them, but not in the same magnitude.

A war with a blockade would implode China's economy, possibly worse than the US/ EU. Which is a big problem for a country whose social stability and acceptance of a repressive government is based largely on that government delivering continuous improvements in living standards and economic growth over 30 odd years. No doubt Xi and the CCP would paint any war as a nationalist struggle against those who want to humiliate China again, but eventually they'd have to try and get out of it. Even in a situation in which there's limited 'hotness' to a war- so no attacks on infrastructure like power etc- China has a limited internal market and relies on exports which would be blocked, and China has no ability to break a blockade. They can transit goods through 3rd party countries like Russia or Myanmar in theory, but that's way more expensive than sea transport and neither would do it out of the goodness of their heart. Indeed, the only China proximate port(s) of a 'friendly' power would be the also readily blockadeable Vladivostok and the already semi blockaded DPRK.

Russia would probably benefit from it rather than lose out. China will want to transit goods through them, and a sea based oil blockade would lead to them wanting more Russian hydrocarbons especially, and other raw materials and food as they run out, with a reversal in leverage. So much so that it's unlikely Russia could supply anywhere near all the demands, but what it could it could set the price of. Also gives Russia a lot of leverage with the west, since they'd be wanting Russia to enforce a blockade (and on Europe's part, they'd probably like Russia to run deniable shipments of key goods through to them).

[Gorth]

7 hours ago, Gromnir said:

am thinking it is impossible to make people understand what it were like during the height o' the cold war. weren't as if we worried constant 'bout nuclear armageddon, but it were always there.

Quoted for truth. Grew up on the "front" so to speak, only a thin stretch of water separating my childhood home from the big, nasty enemies like Poland and DDR (East Germany).

Edit: All new public buildings in Denmark at the time were required to have bomb shelters and many older buildings got retrofitted with it. It was part of my school experience always knowing where the entrance to the schools underground shelter was located. The schools (and other public buildings) had regular drills to ensure everyone could get there at a moments notice in case it started raining nukes.

7 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

He took a step back and he got something in return for doing it. The removal of the US missiles in Turkey. But it’s hard to give him any credit in this scenario when he was the creator of it.

You sort of got it the opposite way around... the deployment of nukes to Turkey, right on the Soviet Unions border was what caused the deployment of missiles in Cuba in the first place. No more nukes in Turkey, no more need for missiles in Cuba (and ICBM's made it irrelevant anyway when they got introduced).

 

As for China and Taiwan. I'm fairly convinced it's not an if, it's a when China invades and takes over Taiwan. It will be a disaster for western PC (and IT in general) manufacturers considering how many essential chips are manufactured and exported from Taiwan to the west.

[Gromnir]

6 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

Have you ever read Von Clausewitz? You should.

am gonna assume you is joking, 'cause lord knows clausewitz would roll over in his grave to hear gd opine 'bout US troop withdrawals overseas. sacrifice one o' the most obvious and effective methods for the nation state to impose its will (at least from Clausewitz pov) while simultaneous advocating a poison pill approach made all the more ridiculous by your stated lack o' trust o' any and all persons who might be responsible for making decisions regarding a nuclear arsenal.

must be joking, 'cause is no way gd gets to invoke clausewitz serious.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Hurlshort]

China isn't going to invade Taiwan. They don't have a track record of doing things like that. They will find another way to take it if they want it.

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, Hurlsnot said:

China isn't going to invade Taiwan. They don't have a track record of doing things like that. They will find another way to take it if they want it.

Tibet and Vietnam might disagree with you on that one. Although they did later withdraw their troops from Vietnam

Edit: Thanks to stealing an arm and a leg when it comes to technology, the Chinese army of 2021 is not comparable to the miserable state it was in in during the 1950's, 60's and 70's

[Darkpriest]

There is some serious problem with the instastory outrage culture... 

It's mostly visible in US, but it has an unhealthy spillover effect to most "western culture" countries. 

Guy was shot in an accidental discharge by a female officer (who mistook her gun for a taser) as a suspect resisted arrest/search, dove into a car and tried to drive off, and you have multiple days of riots doing damage to communities and business, and media muting people from calling riots a riot. 

More prominent case, of Derek C, where it seems the only fault of his was not recognizing that an apperhanded criminal was dying of drug overdose (lungs failure) and not faking breathing problems, and thus this neglect could have prevented saving life of that thug. At the same time he had right to tase his ass right of the get go, based on the call for assistance that was made during the police emergency call. This led to some riots that devastated businesses nd communities in multiple locations, because people jumped onto assumptions based on a small snipped of information, and outrage sells in the media. At the same time, some activist got millions and spent a lot of it for own expensive accomodation. 

How do you expect to go back to orderly society, when people are rewarded for damaging property and unruly behavior? 

This polarization and political apologism got out of hand. 

It's bad for coexistence. Depending on the country and majority support, you get different aspects excused from even most voilent acts, while others get shunned into oblivion even for minot misdemeanor. 

In US, it's the antifa, blm type getting excused and covered, while clasic conservatism gets called facist, and nore voilent protesters called terrorist. In Hungary or Poland you get nationalistic extremists being excused and covered as patriots with some bad apples among them, while women proetesting for more lenient abortion rights or lgbt people for formal relationships status are treated as hostile ideologist and political terrorists and traitors. 

 

There are times I'd like to simply sign off and push a reset button on the world around.