Don’t know if you’re a Frontline fan, but their latest documentary, “Putin and the Presidents,” is pretty interesting. Trump is in a class, since while other presidents may have misjudged Putin or were weak in response to his aggressions, he alone basically embraced what Putin was doing. Biden, on the other hand, never trusted Putin. Always saw him and his actions through a Cold War lens that’s proven to be an accurate representation of the despot. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/putin-and-the-presidents/
Tankies are like reverse neocons…their enemies are simultaneously nearly omnipotent and also very feeble. Whichever serves the current discussion.
I've posted this before, but i wish the media would go back to a revealing interview with Trump in the 80s where he advocated for the US and USSR to join forces as the two nuclear bullies on the block and rule the world. (In his example he imagines the two superpowers subjugating Pakistan. This idea is obviously completely stupid as American and Russia are geopolitical rivals and don't have aligned interests, but the idea gained steam via people like Steve Bannon who argue the US, Russia and Israel ought to align in a white nationalist bloc against the brown people. One of the other issues is Trump clearly doesn't care about the national interest but sees US interests as his own personal, oligarch style interests. Foreign policy is simply a tool to enrich himself. This is how he got played by Putin every time, and once you understand it, it is obvious why Ukraine will be in huge danger from a Trump presidency. Zelensky did not pay Trump tribute, therefore there is no way Trump will send 1c in support. The MAGA GOP has already made this clear and it is why McCarthy & McConnell agreed to rush through the last Ukraine support package in the lame duck. (McCarthy voted against but tacitly supported it). Trump's 'peace plan' is simply to carve Ukraine up at Putin's direction. Incidentally, the same as Musk's peace plan, and the same plan Manafort was touting before he had to go to jail for being a Russian agent
Hertling is also saying the fast light forces might be more important than the new tanks One thing about the leopards etc arriving, is then Ukraine will be able to replace losses of existing tanks committed to offensives with new tank brigades that will take months to train up “In some ways the deliveries of Bradleys, Marders or Strykers and those types of [infantry fighting] vehicles (shifting away) from a Soviet-era armoured vehicle may be greater than that from a shift from T-72 to Leopard tank.” -@RALee85 https://t.co/hZYscVpQ5c— Bianna Golodryga (@biannagolodryga) January 28, 2023
It's going to be even slower for Abrams. They have to be new built - we don't export any Abrams with the depleted uranium armor. They currently say August.
Yes. Hertling had comment on them. It's a shift from the forces Ukraine can use most efficiently right now, to longer term force design with more complex supply chain etc - basically a long term commitment to Ukraine which Joe had avoided until now I think that is the real shift Germany+USA have made.
While doing this would be responsible journalism, don't imagine that this would push the needle one way or the other with Trump's support.
You're quoting me out of context - I'm not sad about his death, just pointed out the "why" we killed him. In retrospect, that wasn't the right thing to do or we didn't managed the "after Gaddafi" the right way if you look at what Libya has become
But you didn't point out "why" Qaddafi died. You didn't accurately state a single thing. 36/100 read actual work by academics.
Previous post Their basket of commodities would be backing their currency which would be required to acquire them. We killed Gaddafi for less than that - of course it matters. He was planning the launch of the African Gold Dinar - a single currency for Africa back by gold.
At the time of the Libya revolution to overthrow him, the country had like 7 billion worth of gold, not nearly enough to back a global currency. The whole idea that that is the reason he was overthrown is an internet myth. The idea was not bad, the African union using all of their gold reserves for their own continent wide currency, but like free trade talks and other projects, it was all talk, lack of trust on who and how this would be managed meant that the idea was not going to go anywhere.
right. the reason why the EU could put up a currency is tight integration. the idea this can be achieved by a disparate bunch of rogue states or countries with unstable currencies is silly. see the pacific as to the difficulties of even creating alignment for a trading zone
Putins allies at the GOP on point. “I will work with anyone and everyone to…end wars…to stop sending money to Ukraine…” pic.twitter.com/uDs6pEtnRk— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) January 31, 2023
Can anyone think of another multi-national currency that had any lasting success? I'm coming up blank on the concept. Establishing the Euro was a Herculean task for some of the most stable and economically advanced democracies (and not every country in Western Europe bought into it). A pan-African currency started by a rogue nation like Libya? Not really something the West needed to be afraid of.
The CFA franc has gone on for a long time but it is pegged to the French franc. The nations involved have to have reserves on deposit in Paris. The internet conspiracy theorists that complain the most about this mostly intersect with the one who believe in the Gaddaffi assisination theory.
He doesn't actually believe any of this. He wants to because History 102 said colonialism bad. But Colonialism Bad =/= Dictator Good, a lesson we all know he knows.
I mean, if we're looking for the list of the peoples most victimized by colonialism and imperialism, the Ukrainians should be somewhere in the top 10% (or bottom 10%, depending on how you look at it). The Russians have centuries of conquest, ethnic and cultural erasure, and outright genocide in their ledger. There's a reason most of their neighbors hate them. For some reason, though, many supposedly anti-colonial and anti-imperialist people have a blind spot when it comes to this history. Would they be as milquetoast about the situation if Russia was invading, say, Mongolia? Reflexively opposing US foreign policy is just as dumb as automatically supporting it.
Never mind that Gaddafi was killed by Misrata-based militias, and as for the why, it was done in revenge for his indiscriminate killing of civilians, and the arrests, tortures and summary executions of his opponents. I don't doubt that the US and Western European powers had their own reasons for wanting him dead, but under the circumstances, lets not cry for him. In general I oppose the death penalty, but the murder of dictators who tortured, killed and oppressed populations that they ruled over are probably the one exception. I would have celebrated with passion if Jorge Rafael Videla had been killed, and I'm sure many regular folk must have celebrated Gaddafi's death with that same passion.
Of course not, we wanted to bring democracy to Libya I think they are just after their interest and not out of some newfound Russian patriotism or their history. Except when they benefit us
What possible interest does, say, Brazil have in seeing Russia oppress Ukraine? I can see countries in the Global South not caring about this conflict, unless it somehow has a direct negative effect on them. But, there have been plenty of leaders in that part of the world that seem determined to excuse and support Russia in this conflict.