"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (6 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Theres a lot to unpack here.

First line: 'it should be about freedom more than bleeding out Putin'

To a European, this statement defies logic.

In terms of annexing parts of sovereign democratic states (however flawed they may be) to re-create a Russian Empire, as is pretty much Putin's stated aim, how do you assess protecting 'freedom', when annexed populations are placed under the yoke of his authoritarian regime?

How meaningful is the freedom of the press under Putin?
How meaningful is democracy and elections under Putin, given he's imprisoned or assassinated most of his political opponents (those who aren't in self imposed exile).
How meaningful are numerous other civil rights and freedoms in Russia?
How do you assess the fairness and equality of the rule of law and the judiciary in Russia?

I'm trying VERY hard not to use foul language to emphasise this, but if the legacy of his behaviour and stated aims within Russia and across the rest of the FSU in Europe don't make it ABSOLUTELY OBVIOUS that Putin and freedom are mutually exclusive terms, then what the **** defines what this should be 'about'? What is it 'about', if it isn't to the greatest threat to freedom and stability in a generation??? Ask a Finn. Or an Estonian. Or a Latvian. Or a Georgian. Or a Pole. There's a long list.

Or ask a Brit like me - given I live a half an hour's drive from Salisbury, where Putin's state employed assassins who used a military chemical weapon *on the streets of a city of a NATO member* to try and kill two Russian exiles, and ended up killing an entirely innocent woman and severely poisoned and nearly killed an entirely innocent policeman trying to give first aid.

I think certain Americans would be less flippant about the direct relationship between 'Putinism' and freedom if such events were occurring on their doorstep. Though I have to say, 20th century history has sadly provided multiple examples of how American incomprehension (and frequent ignorance) of global culture, history and geopolitics which has subsequently and repeatedly bitten them in the backside. And its terrifying to hear isolationist opinions coming from the one nation that should have learned better than any other that we live in an indivisibly interconnected world - and one more inextricably linked than ever in the 21st century. Hauling up the drawbridge doesn't work.

Is America being 'played' when it comes to Ukraine and Taiwan? You're damn right it is. The Chinese are very very much aware that the result of the next US election is likely to determine the course of the entire future of global democracy, American foreign policy, and the fate of the Ukraine and potentially the rest of the smaller FSU democratic nations (as just a starter).

If The US allows its support to wilt, Ukraine will clearly stand no chance of regaining and holding its lost territory - or potentially to even survive as an independent state without concessions and at best an uneasy armistice on probably onerous and humiliating terms. If America abandons its foreign policy principals and exchanges them for appeasement and isolationism, we essentially forget the lessons of 1914 to 17 and 1939 to 1941 and invite a repeat. The current situation is analogous in some ways to the dual threat to American interests from Japan and Germany before 1941, and the idea that appeasing or ignoring one threat makes it go away and allows a nation to concentrate on another simply doesn't work.

Yes, there's a threat in both directions. Accept it and deal with it. Own it. Lead it. Kick the rest of the western world - especially Italy, Germany, Spain, Norway, The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Austria, Ireland etc. to follow the UKs lead in increasing military spending to AT LEAST 2% GDP, with a commitment to spend even more if things do not de-escalate and Russia shifts its policy. Authoritarians and 'strong men' don't respect vacillation or appeasement or see it as anything other than an expression and confession of either moral or material weakness. They respect countries that act decisively and with conviction AND with moral consistency.

Taiwan has wealth. Its economy is four times bigger than that of Ukraine, so it has far more ability to fund its own effective defence with less external help. Its also an island. Take it from a Brit, even though that presents its own issues, it makes an invasion and far greater challenge for any would-be aggressor. It too needs help of course, but the situation is as yet not at the point of war. The Chinese play a long game. They are looking for weakness and a lack of conviction from western allies. Which is why they have started to push upon that resolve. They are unlikely to act precipitously or take a gamble - after-all, wars are a waste of resources (as their more naïve neighbour is learning to his economic cost). I'm sure they are quite happy to see Putin (a fair-weather friend who is actually another regional rival to their interests, if ever that is forgotten) wreck himself on those rocks and take advantage of whatever international political or diplomatic flotsam comes their way. They too look to the next US election with interest and hope. What they clearly want is more division, more diplomatic self-interest and isolationism from the US and less military conviction - be it towards Taiwan or any other analogous example which indicates a collapse of moral resolve. That's what will most likely decide their next steps.

If America fails now, it'll witness nations crushed by both the white and black glove, and together those fists will simultaneously crush its figurehead role as the champion of freedom and democracy. The baton of influence will be handed to the new world Orwellian order of strong-men, gangster demagogues, autocracy, censorship, and overt propaganda through directly controlled state media and surveillance and police ready to enforce in a draconian manner.

Hitler WAS a real person. So was Stalin. Pol Pot. etc etc. History has provided examples of alternatives to a western democratic model of governance which I think most moral people wish had been 'bled out' BEFORE they achieved their apogee of influence.

What choices are people going to make? Its like a referendum on wisdom and morality in my view.
 
Last edited:

You appear to have wrongly misread my point. I wasn't arguing that Russia is providing freedom. I had thought that was plain.

It's a good thing you're not getting rude. Anyone who has been reading this thread knows exactly where I stand on this, and even Stevie Wonder could see that I am not conflating Russia and freedom. So yeah, you're mad enough to cuss? You might ought to be angry at yourself for misreading so drastically.
 
Stevie Wonder can see from my quote that I'm replying to Biff

Now would you like to politely re-think that bit about misreading?!
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
I love ya Thump, but you walked right into that one. lol
Click to expand...
Actually, in respect to Mr Thumpalump, and in humble honesty, I need glasses too.

On Biffs post, I misread 'Thump' as 'someone else in the field of representative national management', the nature of which we cannot discuss, who's moniker is a single very similar shaped smaller second letter away from being spelt the same, and had assumed he was alluding to an opinion held or quote made by that completely anonymous unknown individual to whom I am not in any way referring.

In the meantime, I think we both need to book an opticians appointment tomorrow.

And in my case, maybe also lay of the Talisker.
 
Last edited:
Well played, sir. Well played, indeed. Statements like this go a long way to making this place my go-to
 
One of our regular customers was in today, having just got back from another trip to Ukraine. He has extensive ties over there and has been doing what he can for his friends and their families, packing useful stuff that is hard to get in a war torn country. Always an interesting conversation when he drops in.
I'm surprised by the ease of movement he has, getting at times very close to the active combat areas. Doesn't care for missiles going over his head, but I guess that's better than missiles not going over your head.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 2 more.
    • Total: 7 (members: 3, guests: 4)

    Similar threads

    A
    The coming $26 billion windfall for the Canadian Armed Forces. What to buy?
    2
    Replies
    37
    Views
    1K
    Sisu
    S
    M
    All V-22's Grounded
    Replies
    2
    Views
    1K
    GTX
    M
    All This For The Low, Low Price of .....
    Replies
    19
    Views
    2K
    MIflyer
    M
    M
    The Wrath of KAAN?
    Replies
    3
    Views
    834
    Snautzer01
    M
    The USAF V-22 Mishap of 2023
    Replies
    2
    Views
    491
    Thumpalumpacus
    Menu
    Log in
    Register