Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[gehringer_2]

2 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

It's looking more like it really was Russia that destroyed their own Nordstream pipelines.

Not certain what they're thinking... it's an extremely stupid move.

Now all we need to do is have Germany call an Article 4 and get the ball rolling to start a NATO discussion on what they need to actually be doing with regards to Russian belligerence.

 

 

 

 

 

It's beginning to look like Putin is going all Hernan-Cortez-point-of-no-return and burning his ships. The difference is that Cortez' men knew there was a lot of gold to be easily had in Mexico. Russian men know all too well what is really waiting for them in Ukraine.

[Motor City Sonics]

9 hours ago, ewsieg said:

I know I'm about the only one that is somewhat sympathetic to Snowden on this site, but this is a horrible reasoning.  Because most people could reasonably speculate that the government does something it shouldn't, it's alright?  

It's not alright, but you know nothing will stop them from doing it.     Just being realistic.   Hoover spied on everyone he could the whole time he was in power,  it's just easier to do it to everyone now.  Nobody has that capability and doesn't use it.     But Snowden picks Russia?    RUSSIA?   What a joke. 

[Motor City Sonics]

You want privacy?  Then destroy you cellphone,  all your TVs, all your computers.  Never go online again.  Get rid of your car and get a bicycle. Go live in a little cabin in the woods, but even then, every time you go into town for supplies or food, there will be a camera somewhere that sees you.     

[romad1]

11 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

It's beginning to look like Putin is going all Hernan-Cortez-point-of-no-return and burning his ships. The difference is that Cortez' men knew there was a lot of gold to be easily had in Mexico. Russian men know all too well what is really waiting for them in Ukraine.

+1 for Cortez ref.  Now do us a few bars from Neil Young's Cortez the Killer

[romad1]

7 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

You want privacy?  Then destroy you cellphone,  all your TVs, all your computers.  Never go online again.  Get rid of your car and get a bicycle. Go live in a little cabin in the woods, but even then, every time you go into town for supplies or food, there will be a camera somewhere that sees you.     

The EU has a very interesting focus on privacy protection.  I see that the UK has done quite a bit to dismantle that now that Brexit has come.   This is not a bad thing for people to worry about.   But, again Russia . . .

[romad1]

And don't get me started on "Smart Cities" and Ring doorbells. 

[romad1]

8 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

You want privacy?  Then destroy you cellphone,  all your TVs, all your computers.  Never go online again.  Get rid of your car and get a bicycle. Go live in a little cabin in the woods, but even then, every time you go into town for supplies or food, there will be a camera somewhere that sees you.     

My jaw drops at all the people in certain US Government agencies and bureaus who sport libertarian license plates.  Just profound dumbassery and cognitive dissonance between the crap they are infected by politically and their professions.   

[chasfh]

I would prefer my government advocate on behalf to protect my privacy from self-interested corporations of whom I am a target audience member and not a constituent. I would certainly trust my government before I trust the corporations.

In any event, it’s no longer reasonable to expect people to have to go completely off the grid in order to safeguard their privacy. We should not have to cede the Internet to corporations to exploit as their owned-and-operated resource.

[romad1]

One more addendum for the license plate thing.  Those cost an extra $10 a year.  So, to pronounce oneself a member of the Live Free or Die constituency in Virginia you have to fund more civilization via taxation. 

[CMRivdogs]

4 minutes ago, romad1 said:

One more addendum for the license plate thing.  Those cost an extra $10 a year.  So, to pronounce oneself a member of the Live Free or Die constituency in Virginia you have to fund more civilization via taxation. 

I've always found that ironic. The significance is lost on those who bear the plate. They're proud of being a-holes.

[romad1]

28 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I would prefer my government advocate on behalf to protect my privacy from self-interested corporations of whom I am a target audience member and not a constituent. I would certainly trust my government before I trust the corporations.

In any event, it’s no longer reasonable to expect people to have to go completely off the grid in order to safeguard their privacy. We should not have to cede the Internet to corporations to exploit as their owned-and-operated resource.

Government should be in the business of protecting citizens (individuals) from the predation of other individuals (corporations).  

[romad1]

1 minute ago, CMRivdogs said:

I've always found that ironic. The significance is lost on those who bear the plate. They're proud of being a-holes.

A-holes who live in a gold plated country with plentiful food and diversions.  

[CMRivdogs]

4 minutes ago, romad1 said:

A-holes who live in a gold plated country with plentiful food and diversions.  

I find the biggest ones around here have had the luxury of a shipyard job with lifetime union benefits. Yet badmouth unions and the government responsible for most of their employment.

[romad1]

Compelling reason

 

[romad1]

so...Article 5 is trending.    

[1984Echoes]

At this point it should just be Article 4.

I don't think they should automatically jump to 5 yet, before going through a process/ meeting/ discussion of all the alternatives.

But I am absolutely for putting 90,000 NATO Peacekeepers into Ukraine.

With instructions to remove any foreign invaders...

But that's just me...

 

 

 

 

Edited September 30, 2022 by 1984Echoes

[romad1]

27 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

At this point it should just be Article 4.

I don't think they should automatically jump to 5 yet, before going through a process/ meeting/ discussion of all the alternatives.

But I am absolutely for putting 90,000 NATO Peacekeepers into Ukraine.

With instructions to remove any foreign invaders...

But that's just me...

 

 

 

 

Make them NATO second tier country troops not primary nuclear NATO states and I might agree.   

[1984Echoes]

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

Make them NATO second tier country troops not primary nuclear NATO states and I might agree.   

It would have to be USA-led... you know that.

The UK (Britain actually) was also a party to the Budapest Memorandum so they also should have troops included. 

Aside from those two, it doesn't matter anymore. But Poland, Czechia, Slovakia and Romania would have direct interest as well in participating in the stabilization of Ukraine. 

It could even start slowly, with the US putting NASAMS and other anti-aircraft/ missile defense teams in first. Followed by air support and then combat troops. Start in the west and up to the Dnieper River... wait to see if Ukrainian troops secure the entire western half of Ukraine at least up to the Dnieper (Kherson included), and start from there.

Simply inserting ANY troops/ other into Ukraine will rush Putin to the table to make certain he can keep Crimea. He wants the land bridge... but above all else he MUST be able to keep Crimea.

[romad1]

That will do nicely, Ukraine

 

[gehringer_2]

Navalny writes in WaPo today that only if the system is changed in Russia can the outcomes change. One wonders if that is not still too optimistic.  Then again, he is a Russian, he needs to be able to believe there is some way out of his country's condition.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/30/alexei-navalny-parliamentary-republic-russia-ukraine/

[ewsieg]

On 9/29/2022 at 5:13 PM, mtutiger said:

I'm not clear as to why Snowden's claim should be accepted at face value.

Fair point, but outside of accusations, I’m also not aware of any official accusations that he did so either.  The CIA director that presided over this timeframe does not believe he did either (but does consider him a traitor and was worried he was to haphazard in his actions which could have resulted in the Russians getting information)
 

Note, I acknowledge what he did was against the law. He lessons his position by not arguing his defense in a court of law here as well.  But, If the argument is that we should accept the intelligence community at face value over Snowden, they are the only ones that have been proven to act illegally by the judicial branch regarding this issue.

[1984Echoes]

One other thing:

We have ammunition range 180 miles for the HIMARS and not just the 50 mile range missiles we've been sending them. 

I want the Pentagon/ White House to quit F'ing around because of Russian "feelings" and ship the 180 mile range missiles. They'll be used to hit targets in Crimea and all supply lines in Ukraine that Russia is using. Not Russia proper. Maybe the Crimean bridge that Russia built, but not Russian land.

Quit F'ing around and get those longer range missiles over to Ukraine pronto.

IMO.

[romad1]

11 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

One other thing:

We have ammunition range 180 miles for the HIMARS and not just the 50 mile range missiles we've been sending them. 

I want the Pentagon/ White House to quit F'ing around because of Russian "feelings" and ship the 180 mile range missiles. They'll be used to hit targets in Crimea and all supply lines in Ukraine that Russia is using. Not Russia proper. Maybe the Crimean bridge that Russia built, but not Russian land.

Quit F'ing around and get those longer range missiles over to Ukraine pronto.

IMO.

You mean ATACMS

[romad1]

 

[romad1]

The links between the GOP and Russia