Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
POSTED BY: captaincrunch
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 21:09
VIEWED: 562266
PAGE 486 of 1104
Quote:Going by what the CDC writes and what I saw on construction projects, alcohol costs the US about $800 billion per year. Is America about to stop drinking to save all that money? Will the money saved then go to prevent climate change? Will cutting defense spending increase spending on climate change? I think not for all three questions. Think of all the workers in breweries, distilleries, vineyards, and defense factories losing their jobs. Think of the unemployed beer truck drivers with no destination for their empty trucks! Congress won't let that happen to American workers.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, $37 billion per year. Compared to about $800 billion per year for DoD.
Once again looking at the cockroach and ignoring the gorrilla.
So, quickly doing the math here ... If we reduced the DoD budget by 90%, that would fund the energy bill and leave ... $683 billion in saved money per year.
Given that we're spending $800 billion per year to waste money, energy, resources, and lives, and only spending $37 billion per year for climate change reduction... where are Congressional/deep state/media priorities?
Stop wasting everyone's time with ludicrous propaganda.
Excessive Drinking is Draining the U.S. Economy
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/features/excessive-drinking.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, $37 billion per year. Compared to about $800 billion per year for DoD.
Once again looking at the cockroach and ignoring the gorrilla.
So, quickly doing the math here ... If we reduced the DoD budget by 90%, that would fund the energy bill and leave ... $683 billion in saved money per year.
Given that we're spending $800 billion per year to waste money, energy, resources, and lives, and only spending $37 billion per year for climate change reduction... where are Congressional/deep state/media priorities?
Stop wasting everyone's time with ludicrous propaganda.
SECOND: Going by what the CDC writes and what I saw on construction projects, alcohol costs the US about $800 billion per year. Is America about to stop drinking to save all that money? Will the money saved then go to prevent climate change? Will cutting defense spending increase spending on climate change? I think not for all three questions. Think of all the workers in breweries, distilleries, vineyards, and defense factories losing their jobs. Think of the unemployed beer truck drivers with no destination for their empty trucks! Congress won't let that happen to American workers.
Excessive Drinking is Draining the U.S. Economy
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/features/excessive-drinking.html
It's not a choice between giving up drinking or reducing CO2 emissions bc comparing those two is like comparing apples and bicycles. Yes, they both cost money, but that's where the comparison ends.
But slashing the DoD budget WILL reduce CO2 emissions, not only from all the fuel we won't be burning up tooling around the planet, but also all the fuel we won't be wasting in making shit that we don't need. If you really want to keep America employed (which I doubt) then use that money for conservation, forestry (including urban forestry), environmantal remediation, construction of fuel -efficient power plants, increasing grid efficiency etc etc.
Another excessively flawed argument!
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, back on-topic:
Lavrov rejected the land-for-freeze concept, and he rejected it in the UN.
The Speaker for the lower House of the Russian Parliament said that Ukraine's choices are either surrender or be destroyed.
Several comments by Russian officials (including Shoigu) hint that Odessa and Kiev are targets.
Zelensky's trip to DC was a quiet failure. His trip to Canada was an international Nazi embarassment. And on his return trip through Poland he was not met with a single Polish government official. He has turned from celebrity to pariah, bc everyone knows the "counteroffensive" ... Ukraine's last big throw... was a bust.
Kiev was presented with a lengthy list of difficult reforms on impossible deadlines by the USA govt, or face a cutoff. AHEM!
Everyone expects a Russian offensive some time soon, since the army will be entirely trained up by early next year. Before that begins, expect an intense missile, rocket, drone and artillery attack on any possible offensive or defensive sites. Ukraine might have all of the USA's ISR available, but if they can't do shit to stop the Russian advance, all the ISR in the world isn't going to help.
And, mostly, you should have seen this coming. Maybe YOU don't have a grasp on reality, but reality has a grasp on you.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
September 27, 2023, 12:31 PM, Kathleen J. McInnis writes: I had the opportunity to ask dozens of people from around the region what, to them, “victory” looked like.
1) A frozen conflict. This seemed to be the view most prevalent outside of Ukraine itself. Essentially, in this scenario, the Russian front line holds across eastern Ukraine and Russia maintains its grip on the east and Crimea. Fighting continues, but the major victory is that Russia does not take all of Ukraine. The Black Sea Fleet continues to harass Ukraine at sea and by launching missiles and drones, and Russian forces continue bombing civilian and military targets across Ukraine. With investments in (or donations of) air defenses, the harassment is manageable for the Ukrainian forces. This could ultimately take the form of the war formally continuing without significant gains on either side, or as a cease-fire mixed with intermittent periods of conflict.
As a strategist far removed from the front lines, I was reluctantly persuaded that this was the most likely, but far from the most acceptable, conflict outcome. Yet my visit to Ukraine convinced me otherwise—in particular, from seeing the impact of Russian war crimes firsthand and being told of horrors beyond imagination.
The question of war termination, therefore, isn’t just about which flag is raised over which territory; if it were, a land-for-peace kind of deal could be feasible. Rather, Russia and its military forces have made it clear that they are intent on brutalizing and eradicating Ukrainian culture and people. Russians have tortured Ukrainians (and are still doing so), murdered them, and thrown them into mass graves. Tens of thousands of war crimes have been reported and, according to Ukrainian investigators I spoke with in Kyiv, those represent the tip of the iceberg. To the Ukrainians, a frozen conflict means allowing Russia to continue brutalizing their fellow countrymen and women in the east—and it invites Russia to attack Ukraine again later, once it has reconstituted its forces.
2) Every inch of Ukrainian territory is taken back. Almost every Ukrainian stated that this was the minimum necessary requirement for peace. In their view, anything short of regaining all of the territory that was part of Ukraine prior to the 2014 invasion (read: Crimea, too) would only result in a Russian strategic pause, and another bloody start to the war at the time of Russia’s choosing.
Ukrainian interlocutors also made the point that regaining Crimea remains essential, since the peninsula is a key piece of real estate for launching operations against the rest of Ukraine. Many Ukrainians also see their resistance as a bulwark against Russia’s neoimperial ambitions: If Russia can retain any part of Ukraine, its appetite for regaining other “lost” territories will never be suppressed.
The Russian regime is overthrown—not just Putin. Ukrainian interlocutors who made this point argued that Putin has staked his own regime’s survival on successfully winning Ukraine. Putin has used a martial, violence-oriented vision of masculinity to strengthen his grip on power and Russian society. A defeat in Ukraine—especially when Ukraine has been depicted as alternately fascist and corrupted by Western feminists—would severely undermine the authoritarian order that Putin has constructed. According to this logic, Ukrainians taking back Ukrainian territory could deal a death blow to Putin—yet without some kind of change in polity, another threatening authoritarian actor would likely take the reins in a post-Putin Moscow. Instead, this idea of victory envisaged the hope of a changed and chastened Russia.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/27/victory-ukraine-russia-war-putin/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
FP (Foreign Policy magazine) is well-known to reflect the thinking of one segment of the deep state. I don't recall if it's the CIA or State Dept or a certain segment of "neocon", but like almost all official/ establishment USA outlets, it's not trying to teach truth (or anything like it), just to tell you what to think now.
First of all, the author claims to have spoken with "dozens" of people in Kiev. As part of a recent Congressional junket to Ukraine, I have to wonder .. at what level are these "dozens" of people? Cab drivers and porters and waitresses and school kids and war veterans and surviving family members? Or bureaucrats and ministers telling Congress what they think they want to hear?
The article is behind a paywall, so I can't tell. But considering I question FP's basic honesty and integrity, I'm not sure that it matters, because I don't trust them to tell me the truth about pretty much anything.
And finally, even if the results of this unofficial survey (as limited as it was) were as written, all it tells me is that people there are a delusional as propaganda can make them. Which is pretty delusional, considering how delusional Americans can be. We (Americans) can be convinced of anything for up to a year, even if it flatly contradicts our direct experience, and then the narrative can be switched: the last delusion memory-holed and replaced by the next one (CHINA!CHINA!) with nary a hiccup in most people's thought processes.
Only a brutal, long-lasting experience that directly affects many Americans leaves a lasting impression on the collective psyche. (eg Vietnam for us olderster, or the 2007-2008 financial collapse)
*****
Point being, FP is pushing a newer agenda ('land for freeze') backed by one wing of the neocon/ deep state. (Somewhere in the background is probably an unstated hint to relax sanctions on Russia too.) I know that the CFR is behind this thinking, and I imagine that the DNC would love to scrape off Ukraine - and most likely Biden* too- before campaigning begins. Burns, of the CIA, seems none-too-hot on Ukraine, and neither is the DoD/MIC (They got rid of all their old weapons and now Project Ukraine is cutting into meat as well as fat.) There is still an intransigient nubbin of extreme neocon thought, centered most likely on Nuland, Kagan, Chrystia Freeland (Canada's real ruler), and Ursula van der Crazy who think that an actual Ukrainian military victory is still possible.
The first group is either not listening to Russia, or doesn't believe what Russia is saying: That Russia's beef begins and ends with eastward expansion of NATO which is directly degrading their security.
For all I know, they may be right. All of this tough talk and activity in Russia may just be a big bluff: calling on Ukraine to surrender, publicly rejecting 'land for peace', deepening its relationship with China, building up its own fleet of tankers and insurances and non-western markets (economic warfare), calling the non-western world together for new trade and currency arrangements (economic and financial warfare), mobilizing somewhere in the realm of a 500,000 army, doubling or tripling military production etc etc.
If so, that's one helluva bluff! IMHO Russia could EASILY overrun Ukraine and NATO couldn't do jack shit about it.
The more important question is: What next? Those missile bases in Poland and Romania are a different deal bc they're in NATO. It's possible that this huge Russian buildup to guarantee a "successful" outcome in Ukraine will be leveraged in their negotiations with NATO on the remaining issues.
The second group is just plain crazy.
You may not have a grasp on reality, but reality has a grasp on you.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:US foreign policy will confuse most people because there are six, that is right, six different foreign policy camps. The spectrum of thinking is outlined in the following article "The Scrambled Spectrum of U.S. Foreign-Policy Thinking"
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The article is behind a paywall, so I can't tell. But considering I question FP's basic honesty and integrity, I'm not sure that it matters, because I don't trust them to tell me the truth about pretty much anything.
To read Foreign Policy without a subscription can be done by using toggle reader view (F9) in the Firefox browser. F9 removes a bunch of stuff, leaving only words and a few pictures.
The Scrambled Spectrum of U.S. Foreign-Policy Thinking
Presidents, officials, and candidates tend to fall into six camps that don’t follow party lines.
SEPTEMBER 27, 2023, 5:33 PM
By Ash Jain, a former director for democratic order with the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/27/republican-debate-trump-biden-for
eign-policy-ideology/
Foreign policy is likely to feature prominently at the Republican presidential primary debates. At the debate in August, a question on whether the candidates would support continued U.S. assistance to Ukraine produced a firestorm. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who had previously suggested that Russia’s war in Ukraine was not a “vital” national interest, appeared skeptical, calling on Europe to do more instead. Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy was more direct in opposing such aid, calling it “disastrous” for the United States to be “protecting against an invasion across somebody else’s border.” Former Vice President Mike Pence and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, on the other hand, expressed strong support for assisting Ukraine, effectively standing behind President Joe Biden’s efforts to counter Russian aggression while imploring the United States to do even more.
On the other side of the aisle, some Democrats have been wary of Biden’s policy on Ukraine, as evidenced by a letter (that was later retracted) sent to the president by progressive Democrats, calling for a diplomatic end to the conflict and potential sanctions relief for Russia.
In today’s polarized political atmosphere, such cross-cutting views may appear confounding. On most domestic policy issues, whether political leaders have an R or a D next to their name is often a pretty good guide to their take on any particular issue. But when it comes to foreign policy, the normal rules of politics do not apply. Instead, of much greater relevance is where a political leader falls on the foreign-policy ideology spectrum.
A visualization shows the six schools of foreign-policy thought, four interntionalists and two non-internationalists.
The schools of thought that make up this spectrum, reflecting fundamentally different views about the U.S. role in the world, are highly influential but not very well understood.
In seeking to differentiate between foreign-policy positions, the media often resorts to cliches, such as “hawks versus doves,” or buzzwords, such as “isolationist” and “neoconservative.” However, these terms tend to be oversimplified or exaggerated and convey little useful information. International relations theories are not all that helpful either. “Realism” is routinely conflated with an academic concept that predicts how nations can be expected to behave, rather than how they should. And other theories, such as “idealism” and “constructivism,” offer limited utility in understanding real-world decision-making.
Yet there are critical differences in how policymakers view the world and are seeking to influence the direction of U.S. foreign policy. There is a clear dichotomy, for instance, between those who believe that U.S. influence is mostly positive and that the United States should play an active role in global affairs and th
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, let's pretend that the interventionists to outright rabid neocons haven't been in control in a straight line from Bill Clinton thru Joe Biden*. Hillary Clinton? A psychopath.
Trump couldn't control them, and they've been smearing and sniping him ever since.
Oh, yeah, and let's not forget international grift and many hands dipping into slush funds (eg "rebuilding" Iraq and Afghanistan with pallets of unaudited money, selling protection to Burisma, churning the MICC complex etc).
USA foreign policy isn't "complicated". It's a clusterfuck of psychopathy, delusion, corruption, greed, treason, and arrogance.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
After listening to this excessively long video, and the string of comments from Russian officials, I've come to realize that the Russian government thinks it's outlasted the worst that NATO can throw at it,and there's no more need for diplomacy. They're open to hearing Kiev surrender, but that's about it.
Also, the USA has decided to threaten Modi, including the (Russian) diamond trade in his hometown, and largest diamond bourse in the world, Surat, and possibly the source of some of Modi's personal wealth.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Russia said Thursday that it plans to raise defense spending by almost 70% next year, funneling massive resources into its Ukraine offensive to fight what it calls a "hybrid war" unleashed by the West.
According to a Finance Ministry document published Thursday, defense spending is set to jump by over 68% year-on-year to almost 10.8 trillion rubles ($111.15 billion). That's about 6% of Russia's GDP (per USA Today).
"It is obvious that such an increase is necessary, absolutely necessary, because we are in a state of hybrid war, we are continuing the special military operation," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.
"I'm referring to the hybrid war that has been unleashed against us," he said.
Defense spending in 2024 is set to total around three times more than education, environmental protection and healthcare spending combined, figures calculated by AFP showed.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/09/28/russia-to-hike-defense-spend
ing-by-almost-70-in-2024-ministry-a82589
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
To the Last Ukrainian
By Oleksandr Moskalenko, September 28, 2023
The counter-offensive was not adequately prepared nor equipped. Much has been written about the absence of F-16 combat aircraft as a factor impeding success, yet a lot of other equipment was needed, including mine-clearing machines, heavy tanks, long-distance missile systems, and artillery shells.
Ukrainians have no choice but to fight. Russia’s stated policy is to destroy Ukraine as a nation, either by smashing its identity or killing everybody who remains loyal to that identity.
The only choice is whether my nation should die on its feet or on its knees.
More at https://cepa.org/article/to-the-last-ukrainian-what-weve-learned-from-
kyivs-counter-offensive/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME