RE: Ukraine/ Russia, One of the best lectures I've seen on foreign policy.

[BigBucnNole]

Done back in 2015. It's long, take your time to listen but the guy speaks my language.


Does a good job highlighting how stupid our policy is regarding Ukraine and Russia especially with China there. The policy only drives Russia to China. Could put us in a bind, and this is my personal opinion, if we get ourselves in a bind in the pacific, it could lead to a nuclear war. The pacific is a vital strategic interest and nukes are only used for vital strategic interests.

NATO won't matter when we fully pivot to Asia, let the alliance go and work with Russia, Europe, and the IMF to stabilize Ukraine.

 

[TJHall1]

Done back in 2015. It's long, take your time to listen but the guy speaks my language.


Does a good job highlighting how stupid our policy is regarding Ukraine and Russia especially with China there. The policy only drives Russia to China. Could put us in a bind, and this is my personal opinion, if we get ourselves in a bind in the pacific, it could lead to a nuclear war. The pacific is a vital strategic interest and nukes are only used for vital strategic interests.

NATO won't matter when we fully pivot to Asia, let the alliance go and work with Russia, Europe, and the IMF to stabilize Ukraine.

Your language? Is he giving a lecture how to most efficiently suck the most cock in the shortest period of time?

 

[BigBucnNole]

Your language? Is he giving a lecture how to most efficiently suck the most cock in the shortest period of time?

 

[shiv]

I’m about half way through, but here are some thoughts:

-It seems like Biden is handling the latest Ukraine situation just like Obama did by leveraging economic sanctions

-I’d like to know/hear more about what this guy thinks about China. It seems like he is somewhat confident that Russia will be on our side when things go south with China

-He provides really good perspective on why Russia is pissed about this when referencing the Monroe doctrine and the Cuban missile crisis

 

[shiv]

Prob for another thread, but what is the latest on Taiwan? Seems like things were heating back up again lately

 

[BigBucnNole]

I’m about half way through, but here are some thoughts:

-It seems like Biden is handling the latest Ukraine situation just like Obama did by leveraging economic sanctions

-I’d like to know/hear more about what this guy thinks about China. It seems like he is somewhat confident that Russia will be on our side when things go south with China

-He provides really good perspective on why Russia is pissed about this when referencing the Monroe doctrine and the Cuban missile crisis

Idea with Russia being on our side is mostly down to Siberia and the resources that China wants. There is a sort of de jure claim on that territory to feed the Chinese economy and Russia has to pick between the west and the east. Without Ukraine the choice is obvious. Ukraine muddles that choice.

 

[BigBucnNole]

-It seems like Biden is handling the latest Ukraine situation just like Obama did by leveraging economic sanctions

I don't hate Biden's foreign policy. I did not care for Obama's. Retrospectively because I was a 20 something-year-old retard hate Bush's policies looking back.

Biden seems like he's willing to pick a fight over Taiwan and not over Ukraine. He half assedly said he wouldn't be the one to lead troops into Ukraine but that left the door open to if he would follow someone else sending troops to Ukraine. The biggest issue with Biden on anything is that the institutions are in charge despite my thinking deep down he's saner on foreign policy than most recent Presidents going back to Bush Sr or Reagan. But can he control the institutions? Doubtful.

However, regardless of the media/ intel/ Washington elite revolt against him over Afghanistan about withdrawing, and forgetting how shitty the withdrawal was done, he did ultimately win out in pulling us from that quagmire. Maybe there's hope.

 

[shiv]

It’s interesting to me when he states that the US is as secure as ever even though it seems like there are some explosive situations with both Russia and China.

I’ve got to think that the entire story isn’t been told in his lecture because I would think that there has been some serious thought put into why we have handled it, rather than just trying to flex American muscle.

It seems like in the end, the one thing that both Russia and the US are happy with is just completely wrecking Ukraine.

 

[shiv]

I don't hate Biden's foreign policy. I did not care for Obama's. Retrospectively because I was a 20 something-year-old retard hate Bush's policies looking back.

Biden seems like he's willing to pick a fight over Taiwan and not over Ukraine. He half assedly said he wouldn't be the one to lead troops into Ukraine but that left the door open to if he would follow someone else sending troops to Ukraine. The biggest issue with Biden on anything is that the institutions are in charge despite my thinking deep down he's saner on foreign policy than most recent Presidents going back to Bush Sr or Reagan. But can he control the institutions? Doubtful.

However, regardless of the media/ intel/ Washington elite revolt against him over Afghanistan about withdrawing, and forgetting how shitty the withdrawal was done, he did ultimately win out in pulling us from that quagmire. Maybe there's hope.

How is the way Biden handling it different than Obama?

 

[GatorOK]

Short story. Ukraine wants to be in NATO, Russia doesn’t want to lose its European buffer. The lessons of WWII run deep in Russia. It would be like Mexico allying with China and allowing bases on our border.

Biden is pushing for admitting to NATO. Trump told Ukraine standby and we will support you Economically which stayed Russia. It is about to happen. I give it less than thirty days till the shooting starts.

 

[QuanChi]

He says the US is secure as ever but also in the same breath says that the US will have its hands full with China. I liked his lecture though.

 

[GatorOK]

He says the US is secure as ever but also in the same breath says that the US will have its hands full with China. I liked his lecture though.

Mainland secure. Asia not so much

 

[BigBucnNole]

It’s interesting to me when he states that the US is as secure as ever even though it seems like there are some explosive situations with both Russia and China.

I’ve got to think that the entire story isn’t been told in his lecture because I would think that there has been some serious thought put into why we have handled it, rather than just trying to flex American muscle.

It seems like in the end, the one thing that both Russia and the US are happy with is just completely wrecking Ukraine.

George Friedman probably describes it best in that the only threat to the US is a global continental power.

There is the European plain, and it's what it sounds like, a bunch of flat fuggin land. Russia historically has been at the crossroads of invaders going back to at least the Vikings. They do not have defensible geography around the core of their country so to compensate they pushed all the way to Siberia and the pacific on one side and traditionally pushed through Ukraine and Poland to shrink the sheer milage of the front line to protect. By doing so, it gives them enough population and industrial power to become a continental power and therefore threatens the existence of the US. And there is a little blurb about them controlling the caucuses in the south because without it the black sea and warm water ports that Peter the Great wanted, are cut off.

For Russia to be secure, the prevailing wisdom is that the US is less secure. The counter-argument is that Russia is an aging and declining population and therefore not a threat. Take that and couple it with the idea that China also threatens the Russian core by coveting territory that would be impossible to defend on their eastern flank. Together Russia can't be a continental power and they have their arms full and thus leaves the US safer.

 

[BigBucnNole]

How is the way Biden handling it different than Obama?

Obama was more indecisive and I think to a degree caved to the establishment and offered this weird consolation deal of just drone striking the fuq out of everything. If you recall Obama was against the Afghanistan surge that the rest of Washington and the mainstream beat him into doing.

The biggest departure is that Biden left Afghanistan. You can make the argument Trump paved the way, and he did to a degree, but ultimately Biden didn't cave and we aren't wasting lives there anymore.

Ukraine is up in the air. Signals say he's not willing to fight over it. Maybe he's gotten all the money from there that he needs, but if he leaves Ukraine alone and they come to some sort of arrangement with Putin in the next week or two, Biden will effectively reverse a course of a policy dating back to Bill Clinton. I agree with the lecture, NATO will be DOA and that's not the end of the world.

 

[BigBucnNole]

Mainland secure. Asia not so much

This was also done in 2015, before China became CHINA.

 

[BigBucnNole]

Last comment of the night because I've got a sweet-ass keys trip tomorrow...

But... when you think of foreign policy you have to add in an element of religion or intellectual glue. I don't mean religion tied to Jesus and God per se as much as I mean a ground set of immoveable philosophies. In terms of "religion" the 20th century and has seen more bloodshed than all of human history combined. Even at a ratio level. I think cavemen averaged something like 5% dead from violent means and in the 20th century, 5% at certain points have died from violent means. We've gone backward as much as forwards on the things that matter like breathing.

If the religion is that the USSR is bad and Putin "restoring" it in the minds of policymakers is a thing, what does that really mean? Is faith going to suck the US into a conflict that prevents them from engaging in area conflict that actually does threaten our nation-state? Is the nation-state even a viable/ compatible model for evolving? And lastly doesn't western society even agree with itself?

I don't fuggin know. I'm half drunk but I know we need some answers quickly or this whole ship is going down.

 

[Oler Ted]

Last comment of the night because I've got a sweet-ass keys trip tomorrow...

But... when you think of foreign policy you have to add in an element of religion or intellectual glue. I don't mean religion tied to Jesus and God per se as much as I mean a ground set of immoveable philosophies. In terms of "religion" the 20th century and has seen more bloodshed than all of human history combined. Even at a ratio level. I think cavemen averaged something like 5% dead from violent means and in the 20th century, 5% at certain points have died from violent means. We've gone backward as much as forwards on the things that matter like breathing.

If the religion is that the USSR is bad and Putin "restoring" it in the minds of policymakers is a thing, what does that really mean? Is faith going to suck the US into a conflict that prevents them from engaging in area conflict that actually does threaten our nation-state? Is the nation-state even a viable/ compatible model for evolving? And lastly doesn't western society even agree with itself?

I don't fuggin know. I'm half drunk but I know we need some answers quickly or this whole ship is going down.

When you say: “is it faith that will suck the US into a conflic” I’m not really following you. The US has taken a hard turn from faith in an actual Higher Power and all that undirected emotion has been channeled into faith in the government. We are at a huge crossroads on many levels.

 

[QuanChi]

Some news happening in this the last couple days. I interesting when put into perspective of the OP

 

[Uncle Muscles]

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Done back in 2015. It's long, take your time to listen but the guy speaks my language.


Does a good job highlighting how stupid our policy is regarding Ukraine and Russia especially with China there. The policy only drives Russia to China. Could put us in a bind, and this is my personal opinion, if we get ourselves in a bind in the pacific, it could lead to a nuclear war. The pacific is a vital strategic interest and nukes are only used for vital strategic interests.

NATO won't matter when we fully pivot to Asia, let the alliance go and work with Russia, Europe, and the IMF to stabilize Ukraine.

Does "we" include you, probably not, so shut the fuck up

 

[BigBucnNole]

Does "we" include you, probably not, so shut the fuck up

You arent smart enough to understand.

 

[Rube Reaper]

 

[weaponoffreedom]

You arent smart enough to understand.

you should, in fact.......... burn your face off.............as to ease your own suffering