Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Nah, I meant the OG Nergal, old Mesopotamian god of (among other things) pestilence, war, and the destructive heat of summer (i.e. global warming). Nurgle was named after the critter, but Nergal was an actual worshipped deity from human history, and like... its negative aspects in particular fit the US right wing to such a degree you'd have an easy time claiming some sort of prophecy. They look dead on like some kind of runaway Nergal cult these days

[The_Explorer]

See thats why I avoid domestic politics, especially any time bring up that I consider myself a moderate democrat Which to me is more like hillary clinton policies and the clinton policies from bill clinton. So you can see where my stance is from that and who I voted for Not explaining further or talking about it further than that, because just saying that already brought up people that maybe hard to tell by text, but probably didn't like that as much. (edit: Though to clarify, I didn't vote for bill clinton though if I was the same age now, back then, I would have. I wasn't even close to being old enough to vote for him lol, I'm not THAT old )

Much safer to keep track of russia and china news, since it still effects the US if anything was to happen. Though I think for russia/ukraine, there are hints there might be a crimea repeat and russia just gets more sanctions which doesn't seem like russia cares about that much. Still a chance military gets involved though.

[Lord Shonus]

There's a very real possibility, even a probability, that sanctions this time around would make everything prior seem like a kiss. There's even been some talk in Europe about shutting down energy imports from Russia, which would be a Venezuela-grade economic blow.

This doesn't even consider the possibility that the Russian forces wind up too COVID-riddled to fight effectively, or that Western airpower gets involved directly.

I really don't see what Russia has to gain here unless Putin actually is desperate enough for a Short Victorious War. Grabbing the entirety of Ukraine wouldn't be worth the potential cost.

[martinuzz]

The biggest blow to Russian economy, even moreso than losing gas exports to the EU, would be the promise that was made by Biden, that if they invade Ukraine, they will be kicked out of the international banking standard system (I forgot the name) which would mean they will not be able to do business with any bank in the world anymore except their own Russian banks.
Iran is the only country in the world that ever saw that sanction used against it.

EDIT: It's called the SWIFT system, it's what is used to organise international payments between banks

[Iduno]

You don't see democrats openly fantasizing about murdering all their political opponents, and thus pretending that these two "sides" are equal, grants validity to the much higher concentration of sociopaths, which effects voting, and encouraged things like coronavirus denial and the coup.

You haven't seen Democrats cheer every time poor (usually non-white) people die from disease, lack of proper infrastructure, or natural disasters in red states? Or push policies to make sure poor people in those areas get even less help?

The major difference between the parties these days is if we're killing off non-whites, LGBTQ+ people, and worst the poors because of direct bigotry, or because "we have to" for the economy. Also, if it's the military industrial complex and oil companies or prison industrial complex and tech companies/banks we're allowing to re-write our laws.

[Duuvian]

There's a very real possibility, even a probability, that sanctions this time around would make everything prior seem like a kiss. There's even been some talk in Europe about shutting down energy imports from Russia, which would be a Venezuela-grade economic blow.

This doesn't even consider the possibility that the Russian forces wind up too COVID-riddled to fight effectively, or that Western airpower gets involved directly.

I really don't see what Russia has to gain here unless Putin actually is desperate enough for a Short Victorious War. Grabbing the entirety of Ukraine wouldn't be worth the potential cost.

Yes, also unlinking some part or the whole economy from outside financial transactions in one of the harshest proposed sanctions I read about.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/12/21/russias-draft-agreements-with-nato-and-the-united-states-intended-for-rejection/

I found this summary article of a couple draft agreements. I would disagree with the name of this news article I linked; I think it's more intended for a counter proposal as the article is of the opinion that some proposals may be reasonable while others are not mutually beneficial for Nato (and the countries it guarantees) and Russia; but that some of the obvious disagreements could be negotiated to be both equitable and significant if the negotiations are both in good faith and premised on arms control rather than pressing an advantage over the other. As to Ukraine having the door shut to Nato I think that should be up to the Ukrainian government's decision and that decision, if made by them, also would be heavily influenced by how they are being treated by other countries and if they view tangible results of any agreements made with Russia.

One point in particular the article said was unlikely but I feel I could potentially agree with iin principle without having read the specific proposal and if I understood the issue in greater detail is the limiting of heavy bomber flights in international airspace. It seems that is frequently in the news, yet is quite common as a "sabre rattling" tool so to speak for a very long time. Is there a benefit to making this a frequent occurance so as to lesson the severity of a given incident, presuming no accidents upon interception or violations of territoriality occur? I assume it's fine practice for aircrews, but it seems that could be done in agreement to avoid the sabre rattling effect.

[Micro102]

You haven't seen Democrats cheer every time poor (usually non-white) people die from disease, lack of proper infrastructure, or natural disasters in red states? Or push policies to make sure poor people in those areas get even less help?

The major difference between the parties these days is if we're killing off non-whites, LGBTQ+ people, and worst the poors because of direct bigotry, or because "we have to" for the economy. Also, if it's the military industrial complex and oil companies or prison industrial complex and tech companies/banks we're allowing to re-write our laws.

No actually, I don't, and I knew you were going to say exactly what you said, as that's the closest you can get to the malice from republicans. You may see smug contempt, and an indifference to some republican or another suffering from the very decisions they made. A sort of grim "I told you so". But that is a far cry from "desiring the death of your political opponents". Democrats don't enact coups. They don't post pictures of their opponents with crosshairs over them. They don't post videos of some anime kill scenes with their faces pasted over the killer, and the opponents over the monster being killed.

And the only people who are advocating for things to help the poor are democrats. Not all democrats, but democrats are the only ones. And this is again a problem to pretend that both parties are equal in this regard.

Statements like "democrats cheer usually for non-white poor people dying" and "democrats tell the poor they have to die for the economy" seem so unhinged that I can't wait for you to provide the sources to those, so I can see what sort of mental gymnastics you performed to reach them.

[Lord Shonus]

There's a very real possibility, even a probability, that sanctions this time around would make everything prior seem like a kiss. There's even been some talk in Europe about shutting down energy imports from Russia, which would be a Venezuela-grade economic blow.

This doesn't even consider the possibility that the Russian forces wind up too COVID-riddled to fight effectively, or that Western airpower gets involved directly.

I really don't see what Russia has to gain here unless Putin actually is desperate enough for a Short Victorious War. Grabbing the entirety of Ukraine wouldn't be worth the potential cost.

Yes, also unlinking some part or the whole economy from outside financial transactions in one of the harshest proposed sanctions I read about.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/12/21/russias-draft-agreements-with-nato-and-the-united-states-intended-for-rejection/

I found this summary article of a couple draft agreements. I would disagree with the name of this news article I linked; I think it's more intended for a counter proposal as the article is of the opinion that some proposals may be reasonable while others are not mutually beneficial for Nato (and the countries it guarantees) and Russia; but that some of the obvious disagreements could be negotiated to be both equitable and significant if the negotiations are both in good faith and premised on arms control rather than pressing an advantage over the other. As to Ukraine having the door shut to Nato I think that should be up to the Ukrainian government's decision and that decision, if made by them, also would be heavily influenced by how they are being treated by other countries and if they view tangible results of any agreements made with Russia.

One point in particular the article said was unlikely but I feel I could potentially agree with iin principle without having read the specific proposal and if I understood the issue in greater detail is the limiting of heavy bomber flights in international airspace. It seems that is frequently in the news, yet is quite common as a "sabre rattling" tool so to speak for a very long time. Is there a benefit to making this a frequent occurance so as to lesson the severity of a given incident, presuming no accidents upon interception or violations of territoriality occur? I assume it's fine practice for aircrews, but it seems that could be done in agreement to avoid the sabre rattling effect.

It is normal - very normal - to have your initial offer heavily favor you, but never to this degree. Russia's "proposal" amounts to "dissolve NATO, then swear to do absolutely nothing while we conquer up to the old Soviet border". Or, in other words it is "I demand your unconditional surrender". The peace terms given to Germany and Japan after WWII were harsher, but not by that much. Nobody opens negotiations with that unless they're completely clueless.

[martinuzz]

In his yearly press conference for the Russian population, Putin demanded that NATO makes haste, and immediatly guarantees that they will not expand further eastward. If NATO does not comply, Putin says that 'Russia has every right to use military-technical measures'.

Furthermore, he told the Russians that 'Ukrainian president Zelenski is controlled by nazis', 'Ukrainians are being brainwashed', and 'radicals in the Ukraine are preparing a military operation against Russia'.

[Starver]

...well then, obviously Russia needs to get its retaliation in first!

(In other US news, Kim Potter, former Minnesota police officer, was deemed guilty of manslaughter for mistakenly pulling and firing her gun instead of the intended taser. Sentencing later. I rather feel sorry for her, on what seems to have happened,but of course it wasn't a trivial error to make and the consequences shouldn't be ignored. And there are obviously questions about whether the taser would be proportionate, even.)

[feelotraveller]

On the other hand it could well have been deliberate:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/explainer-confuse-gun-taser-81894695

Sam McGinnis testified that the holsters on Potter’s duty belt require an officer to take deliberate actions to release the weapons. The gun holster has a snap, while the Taser holster has a lever. The black handgun weighs just over 2 pounds (0.9 kilograms), while the mostly yellow Taser weighs just under a pound (0.45 kilograms), he said.

The Taser and gun also have different triggers, grips and safety mechanisms that must be engaged before firing, McGinnis testified. The Taser has a laser and LED lights that display before it is fired, which he demonstrated for the jury, while the handgun does not.

[Lord Shonus]

Reliable sources report mass withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian border. Russian military leadership states that troops are leaving the "exercise area" and returning to permanent bases.

[LordBaal]

Hmmmm. Don't know what to think of it.

[Schmaven]

Maybe the Russian troops are just getting a holiday break?  Probably going right back there after the new year.

[Starver]

I was thinking either:
1) They were just (coincidental?) exercises that are now over. Nothing to see here, and you just have an over-suspicious mind.
2) The "Do what we want or else!" didn't actually get the response they hoped for, and they didn't feel like following up on the "...or else!" bit, or still pretending they would.
3) All is going to plan. Oh, and there are actually quite a few more well-armed 'locals' in the area now as there always were.