Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Prozac]

4 hours ago, FLEA said:

Why yes actually. That is 100% true. 

 

This is a VERY recent development & it kind of boggles my mind. It has been far more common for traditional “leftists” to argue that military alliances, globalism, and extensive foreign aid (specifically military aid) should take a back seat to solving issues at home. It’s only recently that the nativist wing of the Republican Party has taken over and made this issue it’s own. The Republican Party I grew up with (the people you now call Rinos) remembered the lessons of the Second World War and understood the benefits of a more “globalist” (now a dirty word for the new “conservatives”) outlook and it was commonplace to see the more left leaning folks criticize them for it. I feel like I’m living in bizarro world now when I hear conservatives rabidly sounding the mil/industrial complex alarm and liberals advocating NATO expansion. 

[nunya]

56 minutes ago, Prozac said:

I feel like I’m living in bizarro world now when I hear conservatives rabidly sounding the mil/industrial complex alarm and liberals advocating NATO expansion. 

That's just one example of the parties flipping.  Slavery and civil rights, South vs North, federalism, limited government... these ain't your granddaddy's political parties.

[Clayton Bigsby]

The new conservatism is forgetting the past century plus' worth of historical lessons, paid in blood (to the tune of about 200 million dead), all for immediate convenience.  But yay America First!

[HeloDude]

6 minutes ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

But yay America First!

Yeah…$30.5 TRILLION in debt but we shouldn’t put America and her taxpayer’s first.  And the left will literally say it’s because the top 10-20% isn’t paying their “fair share”.

[FLEA]

21 minutes ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

The new conservatism is forgetting the past century plus' worth of historical lessons, paid in blood (to the tune of about 200 million dead), all for immediate convenience.  But yay America First!

He says as he forgot about WW1s lessons on strung out and complicated alliances with no defined objectives. 

Edited May 15, 2022 by FLEA

[HeloDude]

7 minutes ago, FLEA said:

He says as he forgot about WW1s lessons on strung out and complicated alliances with no defined objectives. 

This

[Clayton Bigsby]

Isolationism, "Europe's problem, no way that'll get to us"...haven't we as Americans learned that lesson twice?  More?

And those 'complicated alliances' have thus far kept us out of WWIII, through all the nastiness of the Cold War and beyond.  Why is Russia pissed at the idea of the Swedes and Finns joining NATO?  They lose their ability to threaten and bully their neighbor, and walk right in when they don't get their way.  Alliances are not perfect, Germany's obscene 'elephant walk' of Eurofighters where they had to tow a good portion onto the runway to stage the photo because they were all NMC is emblematic of the problem...but that doesn't mean you don't adjust or fix those things, and not junk the whole thing altogether.

And I'd say security is worth paying for, unless you like Novorossiya.  And opposing that (a new Russian Empire) is a pretty fucking clear objective.

Edited May 15, 2022 by Clayton Bigsby

[HeloDude]

7 minutes ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

Isolationism, "Europe's problem, no way that'll get to us"...haven't we as Americans learned that lesson twice?  More?

And those 'complicated alliances' have thus far kept us out of WWIII, through all the nastiness of the Cold War and beyond.  Why is Russia pissed at the idea of the Swedes and Finns joining NATO?  They lose their ability to threaten and bully their neighbor, and walk right in when they don't get their way.  Alliances are not perfect, Germany's obscene 'elephant walk' of Eurofighters where they had to tow a good portion onto the runway to stage the photo because they were all NMC is emblematic of the problem...but that doesn't mean you don't adjust or fix those things, and not junk the whole thing altogether.

And I'd say security is worth paying for, unless you like Novorossiya.  And opposing that (a new Russian Empire) is a pretty fucking clear objective.

So why do we need a massive defense budget if we have the alliance to protect us?  Iceland spends next to nothing on defense and yet they’re protected by NATO.  Sounds like we should go that route if alliances are all they’re cracked up to be.

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

So why do we need a massive defense budget if we have the alliance to protect us?  Iceland spends next to nothing on defense and yet they’re protected by NATO.  Sounds like we should go that route if alliances are all they’re cracked up to be.

Agree. I don't mind being in NATO if we spend the same as Iceland. Let's do that. We can still help Europe, well just help them as much as they help themselves. 

 

[FLEA]

12 minutes ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

Isolationism, "Europe's problem, no way that'll get to us"...haven't we as Americans learned that lesson twice?  More?

And those 'complicated alliances' have thus far kept us out of WWIII, through all the nastiness of the Cold War and beyond.  Why is Russia pissed at the idea of the Swedes and Finns joining NATO?  They lose their ability to threaten and bully their neighbor, and walk right in when they don't get their way.  Alliances are not perfect, Germany's obscene 'elephant walk' of Eurofighters where they had to tow a good portion onto the runway to stage the photo because they were all NMC is emblematic of the problem...but that doesn't mean you don't adjust or fix those things, and not junk the whole thing altogether.

And I'd say security is worth paying for, unless you like Novorossiya.  And opposing that (a new Russian Empire) is a pretty fucking clear objective.

Opposing Russia is nowhere in the NATO charter. Not all NATO countries are staunchly anti-Russia. 

[Prozac]

6 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

So why do we need a massive defense budget if we have the alliance to protect us?  Iceland spends next to nothing on defense and yet they’re protected by NATO.  Sounds like we should go that route if alliances are all they’re cracked up to be.

'Cause being the biggest player in the game means you get to make the rules.  I like living in a world where the United States is THE leader when it comes to influencing global values, especially when Russia and China badly want to replace us in that regard.

[Clayton Bigsby]

You both miss my point completely.  Russia over the past two months has presented Exhibit A of why that alliance exists and should continue to do so, and has likely completely upended the past 30 years' worth of arguments you're both sticking with.  It's not all over yet, based on the last 30 years your points are not without merit and the follow through from Germany and others is obviously key.

But look at how the world was reshaped post WWII, and how prosperous that has been for everyone, and then take a look at those who lived under the Soviet boot and see the deep scars there.  Pretty sure I know how I'd like the world to be molded.  Don't cede that, or you'll be back again.

Edited May 15, 2022 by Clayton Bigsby

[Clayton Bigsby]

But I think expecting Icelandic industry to produce a stealth bomber, for example, is completely unrealistic.

[Tank]

On 5/14/2022 at 1:44 PM, arg said:

Was it Pope that had the A-10s with the teeth painted on them?

Yes and now they’re at Moody.  
 

World Famous Flying Tigers!  

ATTACK and THUNDER!!

[HeloDude]

19 minutes ago, Prozac said:

'Cause being the biggest player in the game means you get to make the rules.  I like living in a world where the United States is THE leader when it comes to influencing global values, especially when Russia and China badly want to replace us in that regard.

$30.5 TRILLION in debt…

[HeloDude]

12 minutes ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

But I think expecting Icelandic industry to produce a stealth bomber, for example, is completely unrealistic.

But they’re in NATO, are they not?  I thought being in NATO is what protects these countries? 

[FLEA]

17 minutes ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

You both miss my point completely.  Russia over the past two months has presented Exhibit A of why that alliance exists and should continue to do so, and has likely completely upended the past 30 years' worth of arguments you're both sticking with.  It's not all over yet, based on the last 30 years your points are not without merit and the follow through from Germany and others is obviously key.

But look at how the world was reshaped post WWII, and how prosperous that has been for everyone, and then take a look at those who lived under the Soviet boot and see the deep scars there.  Pretty sure I know how I'd like the world to be molded.  Don't cede that, or you'll be back again.

Sorry did I miss it? Was a NATO partner attacked by Russia in the last two months? 

[Prozac]

22 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

$30.5 TRILLION in debt…

What percentage of that debt is attributable to what we're talking about? Whatever the number is, it's a good deal if it means maintaining global peace and stability. And don't think for a minute that the Chinese wouldn't be more than happy to take on that debt in our absence and immediately exploit the ensuing power vacuum to spread their brand of "governance" and influence far and wide.  The world starts to be a real drag, real quick if we abdicate our role in it.

[FLEA]

15 minutes ago, Prozac said:

What percentage of that debt is attributable to what we're talking about? Whatever the number is, it's a good deal if it means maintaining global peace and stability. And don't think for a minute that the Chinese wouldn't be more than happy to take on that debt in our absence and immediately exploit the ensuing power vacuum to spread their brand of "governance" and influence far and wide.  The world starts to be a real drag, real quick if we abdicate our role in it.

In what world is societal economic collapse from excessive debt absorption  considered security? 

[HeloDude]

24 minutes ago, Prozac said:

What percentage of that debt is attributable to what we're talking about? Whatever the number is, it's a good deal if it means maintaining global peace and stability. And don't think for a minute that the Chinese wouldn't be more than happy to take on that debt in our absence and immediately exploit the ensuing power vacuum to spread their brand of "governance" and influence far and wide.  The world starts to be a real drag, real quick if we abdicate our role in it.

“Whatever the number is”…that should tell you that it’s high.  I’m much more concerned about our own economic problems threatening us than I am Russia or China.

But again, if we’re in NATO, then why do we need a massive defense budget?  And if we need a massive defense budget, then why do we need NATO when other counties (Iceland as the easy example) pays next to nothing for defense?

[busdriver]

1 hour ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

But look at how the world was reshaped post WWII, and how prosperous that has been for everyone, and then take a look at those who lived under the Soviet boot and see the deep scars there.  Pretty sure I know how I'd like the world to be molded.  Don't cede that, or you'll be back again.

Functionally, NATO served the purpose of keeping the European nations from fighting one another.  The US underwriting their defense allowed them to focus on trade.

The post WW2 economic boom was what happens when people don't fight and instead trade.

The US benefits from NATO existing, but not directly from being a member.  Being a member may be a pre-requisite for it to functionally exist, but that's a different point.

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Functionally, NATO served the purpose of keeping the European nations from fighting one another.  The US underwriting their defense allowed them to focus on trade.

The post WW2 economic boom was what happens when people don't fight and instead trade.

The US benefits from NATO existing, but not directly from being a member.  Being a member may be a pre-requisite for it to functionally exist, but that's a different point.

Also other organizations have formed to fill that roll including the CSCE, the EU and the Council of Europe. 

[Prozac]

5 hours ago, FLEA said:

In what world is societal economic collapse from excessive debt absorption  considered security? 

I’ve heard the “sky is falling due to the national debt” shtick since I was about 12. We’re not only still here, but we’re still the world’s biggest economy by a wide margin. We might get passed by China someday if you believe their government’s numbers, but their per capita gdp sits between Iraq’s and the Maldives’. I have more/better stuff than my parents did and I enjoy living in a country that continues to host the world’s reserve currency (and will do so for the foreseeable future). It’s almost as if sovereign debt is a completely different animal than personal debt. Who knew? 🤷‍♂️ 

[HeloDude]

51 minutes ago, Prozac said:

I’ve heard the “sky is falling due to the national debt” shtick since I was about 12. We’re not only still here, but we’re still the world’s biggest economy by a wide margin. We might get passed by China someday if you believe their government’s numbers, but their per capita gdp sits between Iraq’s and the Maldives’. I have more/better stuff than my parents did and I enjoy living in a country that continues to host the world’s reserve currency (and will do so for the foreseeable future). It’s almost as if sovereign debt is a completely different animal than personal debt. Who knew? 🤷‍♂️ 

Yeah…the economy is doing great.  I say we spend even more money. 

[FLEA]

Prozac you've made some really phenomenal arguments that we can reduce social spending, back off student debt relieve and not worry about making housing more abundant and affordable. Thanks mate.