Leaderboard

Meanwhile, the young guys are googling to figure out what is being said here...

The other day was talking to a young 20s guy about downloading music and explained how we used to use Napster (he never heard of it obviously) and his eyes about popped out of his cranium when I said sometimes it would take over a day to download one song, only to find out it was a bullshit radio edit!

Self loathing?? Where do you see self loathing in anything written by people here who’d like to see an end to the war?? Im advocating for an acknowledgement that both Russia’s leadership and our’s should take a minute and see if peace can’t be arranged.

I’m just amazed at how leadership is so happy/eager to get back into a Cold War (or worse) type relationship with Russia. We’ll never trust each other totally, but there really is no need to be actual enemies. We’re like the dumb ass tourists you see at Yellowstone walking up to a Bison or a Grizzly just for shits and grins. Negotiate peace and stability!

I wonder, and this is just a crazy theory my captain and I came up with, but if they floated Matt Gaetz to see which Republicans would fall in line and which would protest. Further, how many otherwise resistant Republicans told Trump's team behind closed doors "anyone but Gaetz," and are now going to be held to that promise?

I TOLD YOU NOT TO USE THE PHONE WHEN I'M CLEANING MY ROOM!!!1

Gay.

Gaetz announced he’s not rejoining Congress within the next year.

Did you grow up on a grain farm? Do you know how easy/hard it is to flip crops like this? Equipment? TTPs?

There's a lot going on in here, so I'll try to break it apart for clarity. America is a state, not just an ideal. Obviously we all love the ideal set forth by the founders, but what America is-and-does today is part of America, and in this case, the "self" we are referring to. "Us" is the more appropriate word, but we do not normally say "us-loathing." The past is nothing more than a memory. America (and thus "us/self") is what we are doing as a nation today. Something a handful of posters here portray in a very negative, and thus self-loathing manner. The implication here is that we are being disrespectful. Laughable. Russia and China have violated every possible concept of peace and comity short of an actual kinetic attack against us. They are enemies. That doesn't mean we have to attack them militarily, and there is an entire valid argument over the pure financial decision to fund Ukraine. But bfargin, Bashi, and a few others repeatedly veer into some variation of we brought this on to ourselves. That's self-loathing. See above. Also note: I did not reply to you when I said self-loathing. As far as I can remember, you have kept mostly to the financial argument, where we disagree, but not to blame the US. And if I recall you were very critical of Putin in his interview with Tucker claiming this was all the West's fault. But for simplicity and clarity, do you believe we provoked Russia into their "special operation" against Ukraine? By "provoked" I mean to say that Russia's invasion is in any part justified by our actions prior to the invasion. Putting our misadventures in the Middle East into the same bucket as Russia/Ukraine is to reduce foreign policy/intervention so much as to have no useful argument at all. There is almost zero comparison between the nation-building fiascos in Iraq and Afghanistan with the defense of an "ally" (we can argue that elsewhere) against an adversary. They were different operations with different goals and different cultures and different international considerations with different forms of intervention and different price tags in both blood and treasure. If you learned that we have feckless leadership and shifting attention and prideful generals and difficulties committing, then great, you've uncovered all the weaknesses of democratic governance. But no one is doing it better. No one. Surely you noticed that in your travels, as I did. I have no patience for redefining terms. You can be a moron and make every bad decision in the world and still love yourself. You can be doing a bang-up job and still self-loathe. Lets not play the semantic games every fuckwad professor since Derrida plays in trying to win an argument by pissing on the dictionary. You're better than that. Bashi is not.

standby for inputs from daddy Don

The reason you cannot understand it is because you're mis-identifying a loathing of poor leadership, foreign policy, and intervention as a loathing of "self". I'm gonna go out a limb and say not one member of this forum "loathes" the United States of America. I'd say everyone here loves it, and wouldn't want to live anywhere else. It's insulting for you to say that those of us who do not want to see a continuous escalation of this conflict and others, who don't want more of our taxes and national treasure pissed away, who critique and question the policies/actions taken by leadership on behalf of me and my country is "self-loathing". It's actually the opposite. Surely, you were deployed, probably multiple times, in your career. I got to see all of IRQ, AFG, part of SYR, (countries we invaded) waste $trillions, countless lives lost, and then shamefully walk away leaving the countries in worse shape than we found them. I was all in, just like you at the beginning. But I try to do a little after action, reflecting upon and learning from our mistakes. I could argue that the actual self-loathing would be standing by as an ineffectual as the same leadership subjects yourself, your family, and your country to the same misadventures all over again.

Wanna bet? I predicted his nomination to AG. I now predict he is appointed to replace Rubio.

...aside from real (unfortunate for Ukr) conventional impacts...it's an impressive veiled nuke threat and rattle...something to be analyzed for sure

The good old days…”come on come on, fucking load! Mom will be home in 5 min!”

The Ukrainians aren’t wrong to fight…we’re just wrong to spend hundreds of billions of dollars (via debt) to help them fight. If the Ukrainians want to keep fighting using their own resources, then should definitely go for it.

Is Hulk Hogan busy? Is Sgt Slaughter still around?

It’s a huge, expensive bureaucracy, created in 1979, not 1824…….employs No Teachers and has little to no impact on Education on a local level except to dictate, interfere, and propose programs which spread whatever political and social ideologies that they deem important. Remember it employs zero teachers who teach. The Dept of Ed has been low hanging fruit for decades, and whenever Republicans try to dismantle it, Democrats begin airing commercials about So and so candidate is against education and your children. We went to the Moon and won 2 World Wars, and ushered in the tech age without the Dept of Education.

In summary: Your skin color, gender, and sexual preference have no bearing on your performance...so long as you aren't white, male, or straight

The defense of America is clearly provided for in the enumerated clauses so the Air Force is obviously well within the Federal powers. And, yes, I'm fully thinking of the broader implications. Just to toss out a number, I consider well over half of the Federal government and the things it does to be unconstitutional. Unfortunately, Americans have come to expect an absurdly huge Federal government and the handouts that come with it. Which is also why we are over a year of GDP in debt and some people can't build a house on their own land because someone once saw an endangered salamander there 30 years ago.

It’s been a smashing success

Not just interesting, it's the best summary I've seen from someone who has been personally involved with the Ukrainian government at a high level in the early parts of this crisis. The arguments made here are becoming circular so it's kind of a waste of time, but it would be nice if some of you could put aside your fears, biases, and clearly see the designed and intended progression of this conflict so that there is ultimately a direct conflict between Russia and NATO. The same Western leadership that has brought us all kinds of bullshit from a policy mismanagement standpoint; domestically and internationally, socially and financially... is somehow making brilliant decisions on this issue? It is a retarded line of thinking. It is an undeniable fact that the current leadership of the United States and most NATO countries do not care about the best interests of their citizens. Most people are coming to realize this as indicated by the election. What they do care about is retaining power and streams of revenue. As we the people begin demanding order and civility, War and crisis are the things that guarantee their opportunities for profit continue. When I read many of the replies here, I'm always reminded of "Doctor Strangelove." The unreasonable obsession with the idea that we're somehow under threat of a Russian invasion was supposed to be a joke, but it seems like so many are reenacting those sentiments, but sincerely, and without realizing how ridiculous it seems. NATO leadership realizes it has 60 days get us entrenched in a conflict that can't easily be de-escalated. Therefore: And how does Russia respond? The launched an ICBM. I thought ICBM were kind of a big deal. Not one average European citizen realized that an ICBM was in the air. No alarms, no emergency broadcasts, no nothin. Why? As I said, acting in the best interests of the population is not the real modus operandi here. You likely won't know either. God forbid we have even the possibility of a negotiated settlement that results in the cessation of hostilities, and the flow of cash.

Yes, many. Among them are the UN Charter, the 1975 Helsinki act, the 1990 Charter of Paris, and the 1997 NATO-Russia founding act. None of which place any limit on NATO's expansion or which exclude Ukraine from joining NATO. All of them recognize each nation's sovereign right to determine their own alliances and allegiances. Russia is a party and signatory to every one of these treaties and agreements. Make note, Bashi didn't provide any treaty or agreement that limited NATO's expansion - no such document exists. He provided you a video of a guy saying that Putin (Putin, specifically) warned us not to. That's different. There is no reading of the facts which alleviates Russia's full responsibility as the aggressor in this conflict. They are in direct violation of every one of those treaties. One could argue, as Bashi does, that it was unwise to allow NATO to expand eastward, and that can be a basis for a good argument, but it's also fully opinion, and there is no treaty or arrangement that Ukraine or any other NATO member state has violated that Bashi can point to which places any legal blame on the West. Ask him to provide a receipt. He'll be unable. In 1999, Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia (all former Soviet satellites) joined NATO. Czech and Poland also join the same year. In particular, Poland's accession into NATO had been underway for the entire decade - starting in 1990. Notably, Russia signed the NATO-Russia founding act in 1997 - which as far as years are concerned, comes after 1990 the last time I checked. Also of note, Poland was once a former Soviet satellite. Hey, the more you know! Right? Tough for me to know how long and on what setting I would have to microwave my brain in order to believe that Russia was super upset about its former satellites joining NATO, but would also simultaneously sign an agreement saying it's cool, but then again, I'm no statesman. Hence, why the entire line about them being upset over Ukraine joining NATO is total horse shit. In 2008, Ukraine (and Georgia) were "invited" to NATO at something called the Bucharest summit. As his final act as President before stepping down, Putin expressed discontent that Ukraine would be invited to NATO. Understandable. Falls squarely into Bashi's opinion that "we provoked" this conflict. We get it. Putin didn't want Ukraine in NATO. And because Putin didn't want it, it's our fault. This is the one fact Bashi can lean on and which comprises the totality of his argument. Putin didn't want it. Undisputed. Flash forward to 2014 and Vlad is back in power pushing little green men into Ukraine. I, for one, can always tell who the good guys are in any conflict by who's soldiers are wearing unmarked uniforms, occupying another state's parliament buildings, and then holding "elections" for them which in turn result in the dissolution of their government. Flash forward to 2022, and Putin has his full-on invasion. Personally, my opinion is that Putin is concerned about Ukraine becoming (more) Westernized because of the enormous economic power they wield both in terms of agriculture and energy. Putin (or Russia) losing a substantial amount of their economic leverage over Europe would be strategically devastating for Russia. NATO expansion is a pretext because Ukraine can continue down the path of Westernization with or without being a NATO member state. Yeah, there is a complicated relationship between NATO and Russia given the legacy of warfare in Europe in the 20th century, but there is nothing which has ever limited any state from choosing their own alliances - and this includes Ukraine. Anyone who wants to read them can find them on the internet. Russia has signed all of them. I predict two things. First, that this war will end with Russia annexing eastern Ukraine (Crimea), permanently. As the trade to achieve peace, what is on the west side of the front (Ukraine) will eventually be allowed to join NATO. The second prediction I have is that Bashi will down vote this comment.

He isn't. Stack his resume up against any former SecDef and it is laughable. But anyone who makes the argument that a boot-licking FoxNews host is qualified because he was a CGO in the Army will tell you all you need to know about their ability to think clearly about the next administration.

Am I missing something? How is this guy remotely qualified to be SECDEF?

My favorite part of fam flights with fixed wing guys was with them shaking the cyclic to pass off controls....