State News Networks Embrace Encryption as Russian Censorship Worsens
Plus: Musk rebuffs calls to block Russian news, the curious logic of "Buy American," and more...

Russia's crackdown on information about its Ukraine invasion may prompt some rethinking of anti-encryption positions. Last Friday, Russia announced plans to block Facebook access and enacted a law banning "fake" coverage of the country's invasion of Ukraine. Though pitches as an attempt to ban misinformation, the new law actually prohibits various types of truthful language about Russia's "special military operation," which Russian authorities say should not be called an invasion.
In response to the new law, outside media outlets and tech companies—from CNN to TikTok—said they'll cease operations in Russia or block Russian accounts from posting.
2/ In light of Russia's new 'fake news' law, we have no choice but to suspend livestreaming and new content to our video service while we review the safety implications of this law. Our in-app messaging service will not be affected.
— TikTokComms (@TikTokComms) March 6, 2022
To circumvent such censorship attempts, some outlets are embracing the dark web and encrypted communications. For instance, the BBC is instructing people on how to access its coverage through the privacy-enabling Tor browser or through Psiphon. (Tor reported recently that its use in Russia and Ukraine has been surging.)
The British government has often been hostile to privacy-enabling tech like Tor and encrypted communication. Now the British-government-funded broadcaster is promoting its dark web Ukrainian- and Russian-language sites.
https://twitter.com/mmasnick/status/1499860823694405637?s=21
Meanwhile, the United States' government-owned broadcaster, the Voice of America, has said that it "will continue to promote and support tools and resources that will allow our audiences to bypass any blocking efforts imposed on our sites in Russia." And the U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty has "directed people to nthLink, a free VPN service supported by the Open Technology Fund," reports The Washington Post. It "also provided a link to its website on the Tor browser…and encouraged people to join its channel on Telegram, an encrypted messaging platform that Russia tried to ban in 2018."
These are heartening developments. These governments' support for letting ordinary people use private communications may not outlast this particular conflict. But it's another reminder why encrypted communications and cryptocurrency—which has proved similarly useful in aiding people oppressed by Russia—are not just the tools for crime that privacy-hating politicians often make them out to be.
The recent trucker protest in Canada offers another case study. The Canadian government seized money raised for the protesters on crowdfunding sites and threatened to invade protesters' bank accounts. Whether or not you agree with the protesters' cause, it should be frightening to see demonstrators subjected to such overreach. "A financial police state is an effective means for officialdom to muzzle opposition without breaking a sweat," J.D. Tuccille wrote last month.
Decentralized, private communications and transactions are vital ways to circumvent crackdowns and protect people's right to chat, trade, get information, support political causes, and provide aid without government interference.
FREE MINDS
Elon Musk says his Internet service will not block Russian news sources:
Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint.
Sorry to be a free speech absolutist.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 5, 2022
More on Starlink here.
FREE MARKETS
The curious logic of "Buy American":
We cripple the Russian economy by forcing them to buy Russian yet claim to be strengthening our economy by forcing ourselves to buy American.
— New Liberals ???????????? (@CNLiberalism) March 5, 2022
QUICK HITS
• "Russia announced yet another cease-fire and a handful of humanitarian corridors to allow civilians to flee Ukraine starting Monday, although the evacuation routes were mostly leading to Russia and its ally Belarus, drawing withering criticism from Ukraine and others," reports the Associated Press. "The Ukrainian government instead proposed eight routes that would allow civilians to travel to western regions of Ukraine where there is no Russian shelling."
• Dnipro resident Nikolaus Sires talks with Nancy Rommelmann about life on the ground in Ukraine.
• Why was the Food and Drug Administration so slow to warn of possibly tainted baby formula?
• A U.S. trucker's convoy circled Washington, D.C., this weekend. For whatever reason—small size, poor timing, lack of actual disruption—the protest made little splash.
• Virginia's legislature has passed a measure that will allow banks to provide cryptocurrency custody services.
• The new Violence Against Women Act includes some measures to protect women against violence by government actors. The bill addresses the treatment of women in federal prisons and the sexual assault of people in police custody.
• What happened to Hamilton's Pharmacopeia producer Justin Clark? His "death shook many of his friends, not despite his open use of illicit drugs but because of it: Few people they knew were better equipped to understand the effects of such obscure substances," writes Christopher Robbins at Intelligencer.
• "First Amendment Auditors" target libraries.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Russia's crackdown on information about its Ukraine invasion may prompt some rethinking of anti-encryption positions.
Gaia bless 'em, they'll be back singing the old tune as soon as Ukraine is done.
Your encryption protects me, my encryption protects you.
We're all encrypted together!
Start creating money from home .It is a terribly nice and simple job .I am a daily student and half time work from home. gjh I made $30,000 last month on-line acting from home. Everybody will do that job and make additional money by following this:-
...
Link and a lot of details….... http://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
Gaia? Putin worships the Abrahamic God. You know, the other one of millions who equally do not exist, M'Lady.
*Tips Ushanka.*
Cite?
While people of faith cannot prove their God or gods exist, you are also incapable of proving otherwise. If you choose to believe no God/gods exist, that is a believe; not a provable scientific fact. Indeed, a position of faith.
I make 85 dollars each hour for working an online job at home. KLA05 I never thought I could do it but my best friend makes 10000 bucks every month working this job and she recommended me to learn more about it. The potential with this is endless.
For more detail …. http://rb.gy/u603ti
Elon Musk says his Internet service will not block Russian news sources...
Hero to zero again. DOES HE EVEN PAY TAXES?
Yes, he pays taxes.
More than anyone else, ever.
Now do Biden & book sales.
Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint.
Be careful what you ask for.
Biden: "Hold my beer."
https://twitter.com/Reevellp/status/1500810351192985600?t=kAbN2rnuZQn0ah2WrMyibQ&s=19
The Kremlin has announced its demands for ending the war in Ukraine:
-Ukraine must change its constitution to guarantee it won't join any "blocs", i.e. NATO + EU.
-Must recognise Crimea as part of Russia.
-Must recognise the eastern separatist regions as independent.
Kremlin spokesman Peskov told reporters that these positions have been put to Ukraine ahead of the talks today.
"Russian forces resumed shelling major Ukrainian cities today, but have captured no significant territory after a weekend of heavy fighting with Kyiv claiming to have inflicted punishing losses. Thirty Russian helicopters moved to an airfield near the captured city of Kherson were destroyed overnight, Ukraine's military said, while also claiming to have re-taken the city of Chuhuiv, near Kharkiv, in the early hours - killing Russian commanders Lt. Col. Dmitry Safronov, and Lt Col. Denis Glebov in the process. Kyiv now says more than 11,000 Russian forces have died fighting, losses that experts say are 'slowly becoming unsustainable for Russia'. All of which has sparked hopes - however faint - that the unlikeliest of victories could be on the cards for Ukraine. Asked by the BBC on Sunday whether victory for Putin's men was 'inevitable' - as many had predicted before fighting started - UK general Admiral Sir Tony Radakin replied: 'No."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10585145/Ukraine-war-Zelensky-declares-god-not-forgive-Russians-target-civilians.html
FAKE NEWS possibly.
And Iraqis and Afghanis will welcome us as liberators. I bought into the jingoism to my shame in 2003, but have learned since to question the narrative our upper military and media are using, especially when they are agreeing.
This the thread I meant to post this reply too.
A real bad-ass conqueror wouldn't make half-assed demands like that, backing off from original claims to all of Ukraine and all of the original Eastern Bloc. Just like he wouldn't knucklecunder to Emperor Xi's demand to delay invasion until after the Olympics.
Putin is not only tipping his hand, but is tipping a weak hand! Good!
I hope Putin's sent home not jus ridingt side-saddle, but with his saddle underneath the horse, face forward into a very erect horse dick! With horse turds flying in his face from the wind of his retreating fighter planes! MWA-HAHAHAHA!!!
Awfully specific visual you’ve provided.
Difficult to maintain Zelensky has the best interests or well being of his people at heart
https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1500812687009267712?t=7gB0Djo6KZLyXdOOudMnZg&s=19
Two persons close to the Russia-Ukraine negotiations (including back channel talks) tell me Russia proposed (1) Zelensky remains pro forma president but Russia appoints Boiko as PM, (2) Ukraine recognizes L/DNR and Crimea, (3) No NATO. Ze told them emphatically no.
Peskov just essentially confirmed this, less the PM part of course (screen via @bazabazon )
[Link]
Your argument is that he doesn't care about the best interests or well-being of his people by defending the territorial integrity and political independence of his country from an aggressive neighbor?
Yes, he should just roll over and let the Russians do what they will to his country and his people...I'm sure Vladimir Putin is committed to Ukrainians' best interest.
Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk all held referendums to secede from Ukraine.
Kiev has been shelling Luhansk and Donetsk for 8 years, to the tune of 14,000 killed.
How many Ukrainians should die to refuse recognition of both de jure and de facto seceded territories, and the enrichment of pro western Ukrainian oligarchs instead of pro Russian oligarchs?
How much of the $10 billion US tax dollars are going to help the Ukrainian people? How many lives is US "charity" (extracted from US at gunpoint, btw) worth sacrificing for?
$0. Unfortunately for Ukrainians, they are in this fight alone because they aren't members of NATO and do not have the strategic value of going to war over. We agree on that point.
For argument's sake, let's ignore the questions regarding the legitimacy of those referenda. Even taking the case of Eastern Ukraine off the table in favor of the Russians, there is nothing that indicates that Zelensky isn't still operating in the best interests of his people rather than submitting to Russian suzerainty.
He is defending the territorial integrity of parts of Ukraine that did not vote to leave the country now, he's refusing to let the Russians appoint a new government of their choosing and he's defending the right to join whatever international or regional alliances they determine to be best for their national interest.
Russia is acting in it's own self interest, removing the chance that another neighbor becomes a member of NATO. And since Ukraine is out and other neighbors are in, it was relatively safe because no other country is going to risk open war with a nuclear power over a non-treaty partner.
I agree with Trump that Putin was smart to do this before Ukraine was able to join NATO. That doesn't negate Zelensky's position that a sovereign and independent Ukraine is in the best interests of his countrymen.
Not Robbers, agree with most of your post, but no, Putin was not smart to start this war. The Ukraine was nowhere close to joining NATO and Putin knew that. In the meantime, his country is an international pariah, it is turning into an economic basket case, and NATO has solidified and the continent unified against Russia's aggression. This war was as stupid for Putin as his ass-kisser who used to be US president.
Russia will come out of these sanctions with a buffer state in whatever parts of Ukraine it decides to grant independence as well as a NATO that is solidly anti-Russia but willing to buy oil and gas and that will be more cautious in expansion into Central and Eastern Europe.
You can think it's stupid because ordinary Russians and Ukrainians suffer for it, but Putin doesn't and Russia, the geopolitical entity, gets what it wants at very little cost in the long run.
Not Robbers, I think Russia will suffer greatly economically and that will reverberate to Putin and his oligarch pals.
“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled telling Poroshenko.
“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time,” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations event, insisting that President Obama was in on the threat."
Apples and oranges, but I'll play along.
The US, in no uncertain terms, should never meddle in the internal affairs of other countries in any way, shape or form. This is exactly why the US shouldn't participate in aid programs outside of the most dire humanitarian crises.
Were the US to invade another country to meddle in their internal affairs, say, I don't know, Iraq, I would whole-heartedly be against that as well.
Two wrongs, however, do not make a right.
...humanitarian corridors to allow civilians to flee Ukraine starting Monday, although the evacuation routes were mostly leading to Russia and its ally Belarus...
At least Russia is taking in refugees. PUTIN IS THE HERO BIDEN REFUSES TO BE.
No, Putin is doing it because he is afraid of SleepyJoe.
Of course Putin is taking on refugees. He has always said there is a deep brotherhood between the Russian and Ukrainian people!
OBL has a sad.
Of course! What tyrant wouldn't want his victims running towards him begging for their lives?!? Putin knows the answer to the question:
Conan--What Is Best In Life?
https://youtu.be/Oo9buo9Mtos
Dnipro resident Nikolaus Sires talks with Nancy Rommelmann about life on the ground in Ukraine.
Until Antifa showed up to block her camera.
See, antifa is so bad she had to to got Ukraine to get away from them.
Yet there’s no escaping your squawking.
TFW Ukraine is safer than Portland.
A U.S. trucker's convoy circled Washington, D.C., this weekend. For whatever reason—small size, poor timing, lack of actual disruption—the protest made little splash.
Totally ignored by the press, what do you expect?
That's part of it, but I think the protest itself missed the mark in some ways.
I thought the Canadian protest was tightly focused with a small set of reasonable demands. The U.S. protest is about Covid, I guess... Anyway, what specific federal policies do they want addressed, since they are aiming at D.C. hence the federal government.
Also I think the timing was bad; Covid restrictions are dropping off all over the country so why is this necessary? It feels kinda like "it was cool when the Canadians did it, let's do it too!"
And messing up traffic on the D.C. beltway? Heh. I've lived in this area for about twenty years now; a day where the Beltway is messed up is called "a day that ends in Y". The Canadians by contrast went straight to the seat of government which had more impact.
Also I think the timing was bad;
This also applies to messing up traffic on the beltway. The Canadians appeared virtually out of nowhere and blocked downtown. This convoy gave a weeks (two?) notice before getting to DC. Might as well send Whitmer a letter two weeks ahead of time detailing when and where she'll be kidnapped.
“Might as well send Whitmer a letter two weeks ahead of time detailing when and where she'll be kidnapped.”
Are you convinced that didn’t happen?
What does the FBI Handbook say?
How else was the FBI supposed to pull of their false flag operation?
“Also I think the timing was bad; Covid restrictions are dropping off all over the country so why is this necessary?”
I think this is the biggest issue. I know some municipalities still have restrictions, but I haven’t gotten the vaccine and haven’t worn a mask in months now. I haven’t been restricted from going anywhere or doing anything. I guess if I wanted to go to a sporting event I might have to, but I don’t want to go to any sporting event enough to even look into it. Rather stay home with my 65” TV and regular priced beer and food.
One of the biggest problems I think they had was scrupulously trying not to appear as another J6 INSURRECTION. They were too polite.
Timing is also a problem. If they snarl the beltway and block off DC now, with all the Ukraine war shit going on, you're not going to gain favor with anyone. Everyone is busy supporting democracy in Ukraine and banning Russians from being alive on the planet.
Covid vaccinations to enter the country or work in hospitals? Those are federal.
This. There is no day, night, weekend or holiday when Beltway traffic doesn't suck out loud.
yeah, LA and Bay Area are ground zero for Coooovid bullshit. They should have ended there, I would welcome them as liberators.
There and Sacramento. Those assholes are infecting the rest of the state with their hypochondria. Whenever someone says "California dropped mask mandates" they forget that they are still in place for concerts and other indoor events, along with vaccine passports, and NOT just in the hell that is Los Angeles.
Where the hell were they a year ago when it wasn't already sort of beside the point?
I like to think that the Canadian protests and the threat of similar here helped to speed the dropping of restrictions and vaccine mandates. But I don't really know.
It was also a month too late.
Trying to stay out of the DC gulags.
Why was the Food and Drug Administration so slow to warn of possibly tainted baby formula?
Hey, the global depopulation scheme just got an unexpected boost fall in their laps after the fall of COVID panic and you want them to toss it away?
For whatever reason—small size, poor timing, lack of actual disruption—the protest made little splash.
I pay all this in taxes and this is the best the feds could muster? Lame.
Reportedly, the truckers circling of DC was thwarted by DC beltway traffic.
Cite?
Virginia's legislature has passed a measure that will allow banks to provide cryptocurrency custody services.
Custody, eh?
The new Violence Against Women Act includes some measures to protect women against violence by government actors.
What if it's lady law enforcement doing it? MIND BLOWN.
What if it's lady law enforcement doing it?
They're just doing it because the men tell them to.
Great movie. If you’re into that kind of thing.
What if they identify as women for that purpose?
"Russia announced yet another cease-fire and a handful of humanitarian corridors to allow civilians to flee Ukraine starting Monday, although the evacuation routes were mostly leading to Russia and its ally Belarus, drawing withering criticism from Ukraine and others," reports the Associated Press."
The fact that Ukrainian refugees have not been fleeing the cities for Belarus, Russia, and the Russian controlled parts of eastern Ukraine should be telling. Despite Putin's claims about how the Ukrainians and the Russians are one people, when Ukrainian civilians make a break for it, they run for Poland or Romania--in the opposite direction of Russia--and the Russians are apparently slaughtering them for it.
They don't look like one people to me.
That doesn't say much. The vast majority of fleeing Ukrainians are heading west because that's the direction away from the fighting.
In the southern part of Ukraine, I'm not sure that's true at all.
"The Red Cross says civilian safe passage from the Ukrainian city of Mariupol has been "halted" amid reports of Russian shelling."
"Ukraine: Second attempt to evacuate civilians from Mariupol fails"
https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-second-attempt-to-evacuate-civilians-from-mariupol-fails-as-it-happened/a-61030032
Go look where Mariupol is on the map relative to Russian forces. The place is surrounded, and the people trapped there don't appear to want to go to Russia or Russian controlled Ukraine.
So evacuees from a town that was west of the front line when the shooting started and is allegedly still not east of the front line (if it's still getting shelled by Russian forces) want to escape west (allegedly)?
Try to find stories about Mariupol from prior to 2022 and who's controlled it.
The grayzone article I linked below is a good start.
*Those* Ukrainians are all Nazis, you see.
Cite?
You must have missed Mizek's screed yesterday.
The would be refugees in those areas seem to be prohibited from leaving by Ukrainian paramilitaries.
"The would be refugees in those areas seem to be prohibited from leaving by Ukrainian paramilitaries."
Oh Jesus, that's stupid!
Nonetheless, it's what the Ukrainian militias have been doing.
Did you get that from another one of your obscure Twitter sources?
The sources you've been citing have an unbroken record of being wrong, lying, and/or outright fabricating stories over the last 2+ years.
What makes more sense: that people in a war zone are so picky about destination that they'd rather stay where they are, or that militias who are outmatched and have already been waging war for 8 years are forcibly keeping people in cities to act as human shields?
You're saying that it makes sense that those good ol' Russians just want to help but those evil Ukrainians keep thwarting them? That's what makes sense here?
In the context of a military conflict the Russians are winning, which they are in this area at least, and in which they're well aware of how any action will be reported by western and pro-western Ukrainian media, yes it makes sense that Russia will try to minimize civilian casualties.
Look up WHO the Ukrainian forces in this area are.
You have no idea how far off the tracks this train has tumbled.
P.S. The fire at the nuclear reactor was a hoax.
Putin wouldn't shell a nuclear reactor.
Doesn't it trigger an alarm that they lied about this in an attempt to get us to get involved?
It should. Trigger an alarm I mean.
Ahem. Conscription of all military aged males, or freely letting people leave the country when their lives are in ruins. These are not mutually inclusive policies, and less so given fractured enforcement.
https://twitter.com/BryanDeanWright/status/1500805994913284096?t=IehBNxF7YKd02vBnt6hGSQ&s=19
Joe Biden’s America stands up to tyranny. Except in Venezuela. Because we need their oil. [Link]
SleepyJoe is a failure.
Is he?
Depends on the regime's goals.
Sleepy Joe is succeeding at what his handlers put him in office to do.
Eat pudding, take afternoon naps and shit his pants?
Continue to destroy the American middle class.
^
Continue to destroy
theAmerican middle class.FTFY 🙂
I came out against boycotting Russian oil yesterday--because I'm an American, I care about America first, and the government forcing Americans to sacrifice their standard of living to pay higher gas prices for the benefit of the Ukrainians is something a progressive would do.
To the extent that we should support the Ukrainian cause, we should only do so because it's in the best interests of the American people, and I don't see why buying Venezuelan oil would be any different. If it's in the best interests of the American people to buy Venezuelan oil, that's what we should do.
Is your pro-Putin stance so far gone that you don't care about the American people and their standard of living at all anymore?
Snap out of it, Ken.
You want the American people to pay higher gas prices to cancel Venezuela--like some kind of progressive--and you think I should snap out of it? You've completely turned your back on America first. I bet your family is ashamed of you. Take down your American flags already.
You're broken, Ken.
Does that mean you do or don't want the government to force Americans to sacrifice more of their income for gas?
Christ Ken, what is wrong with you lately? Straw man fallacies, Manichean dualism, apparent zero sum worldview on some issues. Disagreeing with someone on sociopolitical matters is typical around here, but the level of immature back and forth you are indulging in is counterproductive lashing out.
Manichean dualism?
I'd ask you to give me a good reason to believe that Putin is shelling the cities to minimize civilian casualties, but that would be asking you to engage in bothsideism--and there is no reason to believe such a ridiculous thing that is worthy of serious consideration.
How is that pro putin?
"Is your pro-Putin stance so far gone that you don't care about the American people and their standard of living at all anymore?"
Nardz is pro-Putin.
You argue against this rational all the time., because people do it to you How is what nards posted pro putin? Are you arguing that it's not moral hypocracy, or are you going against the person and not what was said/the idea that was stated.
Nardz has been posting pro-Putin propaganda all week.
Don't take my word for it. See what he's posted over the last week. Watch what he posts going forward.
Because it's wrong to falsely claim someone is pro-something or other doesn't mean it's wrong to call it like you see when they are consistently pro-something or other.
Tony claims that the Jews didn't have a right to their lives during the holocaust--because he'd rather give a veneer to the holocaust than admit that our rights exist even if the government says otherwise. Accurately calling that out for what it is--is not a personal attack. He's probably not antisemitic. He's just so totalitarian progressive, he can't stand the thought that people's rights exist regardless of whether the government says so.
Misek, apparently consistently and persistently, makes posts like the one from over the weekend, which was nothing but antisemitic. If someone posts persistently antisemitic comments over a significant period of time, it isn't unreasonable to think he's probably antisemitic.
A swimmer is someone who swims.
A jogger is someone who jogs.
A pro-Putin apologist is someone who defends Putin's motives and actions.
Someone who consistently and persistently defends Putin's objectives and rationalizations is a Putin-apologist, and if they don't like being called out for what they are, then maybe they should stop flooding a libertarian website with pro-Putin propaganda.
Ken has been posting pro totalitarian globalist propaganda all week.
I have asserted it, therefore it is true.
Serious question, Ken:
What outside of corporate media is NOT "Kremlin/pro-Putin propaganda"?
Is there any information that is not negative for Russia or is negative for Ukraine that could possibly be true?
Or is reality one where everybody on your side is wholly Good, and everyone who disagrees with you in any way pure Evil?
Or is reality one where everybody on your side is wholly Good, and everyone who disagrees with you in any way pure Evil?
Haven't you learned anything from his tirades about how progressives aren't even human beings? The answer to your question is "Does the word 'duh' mean anything to you?"
Ideas!
Please do go on with this stance given your last 2 years of defending Biden by attacking anything you deem conservative or calling others Trump cultists.
He has never, not once, said they aren’t human beings.
It is patently obvious that they are definitely the worst PEOPLE in America, from the progressive liberals of the FDR variety all the way through the progressive conservatives of the Bush Jr. variety.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZcGB9FGUvs
Best. Movie. Ever.
Better than Mean Girls?
"What outside of corporate media is NOT "Kremlin/pro-Putin propaganda"?"
Ultimately, it isn't about the sources. If Putin speaks the truth, it is what it is. If the entire news media lies to us about Saddam's WMD, it is what it is. As I've said many time over the past week, the test for whether a source is accurate isn't the ad hominem fallacy (something is wrong because of who said it) and it isn't the appeal to authority fallacy (something is right because of who said it). The ultimate test is whether it's rational and whether it's consistent with the known facts--and your Twitter sources 1) consistently fail both test.and 2) are consistently in harmony with Russian propaganda.
Stop looking for someone to believe in, and start looking for what to believe.
1) The position that the Ukrainian people would want to be subjected to Russian domination if it weren't for the CIA is stupid on its face--because it ignores the facts and is irrational.
2) The position that Putin is shelling Ukranian cities because he wants to limit civilian casualties is stupid on its face because it ignores the facts and is irrational.
Invading and occupying Iraq was not in the best interests of the United States--regardless of what the CIA and the entire news media said about whether he had WMD. But It's like you're going around trying to find a trustworthy news source to tell you whether he has WMD.
A U.S. invasion and occupation of Syria was not in the best interests of the United States--regardless of whether Assad used chemical weapons on his own people. But it's like you're going around trying to find a trustworthy news source to tell you whether Assad used chemical weapons on his own people.
Anyone looking for a news source to believe in is doomed to failure.
Abandon all hope and start using your critical thinking skills.
The shit you consistently link to on Twitter consistently doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense to YOU, Ken, because you're as bigoted as can be on this issue.
YOU think: Putin is a madman who wants to conquer all of eastern Europe, that Ukraine might beat Russia but if they don't Russia will invade the NATO Baltic states, and that the madman Putin will respond rationally to incentives despite being completely irrational according to your psychological assessment of him.
YOU are the one attacking sources and calling anything that disagrees with what YOU think "propaganda".
I actually agree with Nardz here. A lot of Ken's defense of his side requires one to believe his assertion that Russia will continue to take over eastern european states including NATO ones.
"1) The position that the Ukrainian people would want to be subjected to Russian domination if it weren't for the CIA is stupid on its face--because it ignores the facts and is irrational."
Strawman. You're lying about the argument, and if you're not consciously doing so, you're psychotic.
Eastern Ukrainians prefer Russian relations to a Kiev regime that has been actively hostile to them since coming to power in 2014. The US State Department and CIA had an active role in forming that government and supported the coup which led to it. This is well documented fact.
"2) The position that Putin is shelling Ukranian cities because he wants to limit civilian casualties is stupid on its face because it ignores the facts and is irrational."
Again, you're lying about the argument. Russia is at war with Ukraine. Shelling strategic targets is part of war. There have been 360ish civilian deaths in 2 weeks. That number would be a lot higher (also lower if males 18-60 were left out) if Russia weren't trying to limit civilian casualties at least somewhat. Ukraine army and militia are using residential areas as bases, yet none of the cities look like Grozny.
"The test for whether a source is accurate isn't the ad hominem fallacy (something is wrong because of who said it) and it isn't the appeal to authority fallacy (something is right because of who said it). The ultimate test is whether it's rational and whether it's consistent with the known facts"
----Ken Shultz
Geiger Goldstaedt,
Things aren't true because I said so, and the fact that you don't understand what I wrote may suggest that you're either not smart enough to understand what you read or maybe English isn't your native language. Another reasonable explanation is that you don't want to understand what you read. Whatever the explanation, that's really embarrassing.
Nardz,
There isn't anything bigoted about rejecting your news sources because they're irrational and inconsistent with the facts.
Did someone in your past try to convince you that you can't think for yourself or did that just come to you naturally? Are you afraid that you're incapable of thinking for yourself?
Shorter Ken: I'm right about everything and if you disagree you're mentally defective.
"Did someone in your past try to convince you that you can't think for yourself or did that just come to you naturally? Are you afraid that you're incapable of thinking for yourself?"
What a hilarious statement from someone whose posts have become indistinguishable from CNN
"A lot of Ken's defense of his side requires one to believe his assertion that Russia will continue to take over eastern european states including NATO ones."
----JesseAz
Because I haven't detailed the argument in every thread doesn't mean I haven't done so in the past. I'll give part of the argument here.
Putin has been explicit about his desires for expansion in an essay he wrote about how the Ukrainian people and the Russian people are one people back in July of 2021. I posted a link to it several times before the invasion when I made this argument. I can give you the link to read it for yourself now, but the Kremlin website is either under a DoS attack or its being blocked by someone. At least every time I try to link it, it goes to nothing. Maybe you'll have better luck.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
1) In that article, Putin extends his claims of Ukraine being a part of Russia to include Lithuania. If you can get through, look for the part that begins:
"The southern and western Russian lands largely became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which – most significantly – was referred to in historical records as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia".
----Vladimir Putin
The Grand Duchy of Lithuania included Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. In short, the rationalization Putin used to justify his claim that the Ukraine is part of Russia was also used in the same document to justify the claim that the Baltics and Poland are part of Russia, too.
The Baltics and Poland understand this, which is why they're doing everything they can to help Ukraine. They know they're the next item on Putin's shopping list.
2) It should be clear that Putin's desire for expansion isn't constrained by international law, a fear of being ostracized internationally, a fear of being cut off from the world economy, or a fear of being over thrown by his oligarchs or the Russian people. He doesn't care about human rights or how many people are killed.
So, what's stopping Putin from overrunning Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland? I argue that it's just that he doesn't have the force of arms necessary to do so. He may not have the force of arms necessary to pacify the Ukraine, which is what is really scary. A rational actor looks at the costs and benefits, sees that he's likely to lose, and restrains himself out of self-interest.
We failed to act rationally before we invaded and occupied Iraq, and if it hadn't been for our failures in Iraq, I suspect we might have invaded and occupied Syria. Putin failed to act in his own best interests in the Ukraine. What he's getting, if anything, will cost him more than it's worth, and while I hope failing in Ukraine will be enough to stop him from biting off more, I fear that he may not learn from his mistakes.
The only thing stopping him from going after our NATO allies is NATO.
3) This argument is by no means exhaustive, but it's a pretty good outline.
"Where? I do not see this claim appearing anywhere in the source material you linked to."
If there was any doubt about what Putin meant in his argument claiming that the Ukrainians and Russians are the same people, it disappeared the moment he invaded the Ukraine.
If you don't see why Putin making the same claim for Lithuania in the same document, it's probably because you're either too stupid to see what's right in front of your face or it's because you're a willfully obtuse troll.
It could be a mixture of the two. I think this is what people around here are talking about when they talk about "sealioning".
Ken,
Please present evidence of your assertions instead of treating your predictions as fact. Russia has been pretty firm they will not attack NATO, which is why they condition Ukranian cease fires on not joining NATO. Your assertions are in opposition to reality.
"Russia has been pretty firm they will not attack NATO, which is why they condition Ukranian cease fires on not joining NATO. Your assertions are in opposition to reality."
----JesseAz
I haven't seen Russia saying they wouldn't attack NATO. I have seen Russia threaten us with nuclear weapons over the last week. Do you have a link for Putin promising not to attack NATO?
The reason we shouldn't let Putin have a veto over who we make our allies in the future is because Putin wasn't elected the President of the United States. If Biden had given in on that point, he should have been impeached.
The evidence for Putin making the same case for the Baltics and Poland being part of Russia as he did for the Ukraine being part of Russia is in the same document he ultimately used to justify the invasion of Ukraine. He wrote the case for the Baltics and Poland being part of Russia in the same document he used to say that the Ukraine was part of Russia! Why pretend otherwise?
The evidence that Putin's desire for expansion isn't constrained by international law, a fear of being ostracized internationally, a fear of being cut off from the world economy, a fear of being overthrown by the oligarchs, or a fear of being overthrown by his own people is that he invaded Ukraine despite the risks associated with violating international law, despite the risk of being ostracized internationally, despite the risk of being cut off from the world economy, despite the risk of being overthrown in a coup by the oligarchs, and despite the risk of being overthrown by his own people. If those things didn't stop him from invading the Ukraine, why would they work to stop him from attacking our allies?
The evidence that Putin doesn't care about human rights or civilian casualties is his disregard for the human rights and civilian casualties since he's invaded the Ukraine. He's killing thousands of civilians, and he's imprisoning thousands of his own people. Care to make the case that these things will scare him out of attacking our allies?
None of this stuff is theoretical anymore. That's why the Germans are spending $110 billion immediately to bring their defense spending up to 2% of their GDP, and that's why the Germans are abandoning a rule not to send munitions into a conflict going back to the end of World War II. That's why the French are bringing their defense spending up to 2% of their GDP. That's why Poland is looking at giving up their fighter jets to the Ukrainians--and that's why the U.S. is willing to let Poland by American F-15s to replace them. That's why Sweden and Finland are suddenly thinking about joining NATO. These countries are assessing the real risks in the real world, and they're spending real money to deal with them because they can see the real world evidence of Putin's ambitions and his disregard for the risks.
This isn't a criminal trial where you need a taped confession in order to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Putin laid out a justification for invading Ukraine in that essay, and then he invaded Ukraine--despite it clearly not being in his best interests to do so. In that same document, he also made the same justification for the Baltics and Poland being a part of Russia. There is a sizable Russian minority in the Baltics. Attacking the Baltics wouldn't be in Putin's best interests, but attacking the Ukraine wasn't either. If Putin doesn't try to invade the Baltics and Poland, it won't be because of the goodness in his heart. It will only because he fears the negative consequences of doing so. It will only be about the deterrent of NATO.
Imagine what it would be like if the only reason Biden didn't invade Mexico, claim its territory, install a puppet, and chase its people out of the country was because he feared the military consequences of doing so. Much of Mexican territory would be ours already. Biden has to worry about human rights, international law, American public opinion, midterm elections, the effects on the economy, and he may have something like a rudimentary conscience--although it's often hard to tell. Putin doesn't care about any of that, and the evidence is right front of us. It's what he's done over the past two weeks.
Closing our eyes to the evidence of what is happening in front of us and why isn't the solution to any of our problems.
Regardless of if he is pro putin or not, how is the link not showing the hypocrisy of the Biden administration?
You deal with this all the time when the Jeff's say you are a trump supporter. You correctly point out that weather or not you support trump has no bearing on the argument.
This is the same situation
Hypocrisy can be a good thing.
Here's Norm MacDonald explaining why Cosby being a hypocrite wasn't the worst thing about him. In fact, hypocrisy is probably a good quality in a rapist. Or do you think rapists should go around openly promoting rape as an excellent way of life--just so no one can accuse them of being a hypocrite?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2rcquwo4R0
If Hitler had been a total hypocrite and never done any of the things he wrote about doing in Mein Kampf, I'd have thought more of him for being a hypocrite. And, yeah, I think Joe Biden being a hypocrite about using the coercive power of government to force average Americans to pay more for gasoline is a good thing--because I'm an American, a capitalist, a libertarian, and because I believe in putting America first.
I could have just linked to this . . .
"Tu quoque (Latin for “you also”), or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent’s argument by asserting the opponent’s failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s). That is, it is claimed that the argument is flawed by pointing out that the persona making the argument is not acting consistently with the claims of the argument.
https://cognitive-liberty.online/tu-quoque-fallacy-appeal-to-hypocrisy/
. . . but that would have precluded a link to Norm MacDonald.
So the US supporting the totalitarian murdoro regime is good because Russia?
"So the US supporting the totalitarian murdoro regime is good because Russia?"
----Rev. Arthur L. Kuckland
Individual Americans making choices for themselves is better than Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer--using the government to force us to make the choices they like--because authoritarian, progressivism is bad and libertarian capitalism is good.
I haven’t been into every article, but of what I have seen, no he hasn’t been posting pro-Putin stuff. More like anti-Ukraine and anti-western propaganda stuff.
Keep watching.
Do you believe the Russians shelling a nuclear reactor was a hoax?
Was it the reactor itself that was shelled? Did it explode?
One of Nardz' favorite, obscure, pro-Putin tweets was not a good reason to believe that the story of a nuclear reactor being shelled by the Russians was a hoax.
Judge for yourself:
https://reason.com/2022/03/03/our-insane-government-spending-will-hurt-our-response-to-ukraine/?comments=true#comment-9386404
As you'll see, Ken is again lying.
His increasingly shrill tone and consistent lying belies his claims to rationality and logic.
Nardz linking to himself spreading pro-Putin propaganda isn't good evidence that he's not spreading pro-Putin propaganda. It's just evidenced that Nardz is stupid.
Because the Ukrainians were defending against a Russian attack means the Russians weren't attacking a nuclear reactor? That the Russians were justified in attacking a nuclear reactor?
Those questions aren't even worth serious consideration. We're talking about is a terrible case of bothsideism at best. But don't take my for that. Listen to Nardz.
"Where can I read about the Russian side of the war? The telegram channel I follow has been cut off. Everything I’m reading is distorted and only showcasing the Ukrainian side. Some of it is obviously false. We need to hear both sides to get to the truth."
----Nardz
https://reason.com/video/2022/03/05/can-elon-musks-starlink-keep-ukraine-online/?comments=true#comment-9389041
Once we've listened to Nardz Russian justification for killing all these civilians, maybe we should listen to the Nazis' justification for the holocaust, or the Khmer's Rouge's side of the argument?
There's this thing called bothsideism, and Nardz is too stupid to understand what it means--so he goes around spreading pro-Putin propaganda like an idiot.
P.S. A fire either started at a nuclear power plant because the Russians shelled it or not--no matter what Nardz' stupid tweets say.
I’m not going off one of Natdz’s pro-Putin tweets. I’m going off the fact that whatever military offensive at the nuclear PLANT is over, and there wasn’t a nuclear explosion.
You realize the reactor is only part of the PLANT, right?
"I’m not going off one of Natdz’s pro-Putin tweets. I’m going off the fact that whatever military offensive at the nuclear PLANT is over, and there wasn’t a nuclear explosion . . . You realize the reactor is only part of the PLANT, right?"
Yes! It was behind the plant.
But I was talking about simple pro-Putin denialism on Nardz' part.
Nardz said I was broken because I criticized the Russians for shelling a nuclear power plant. Apparently, because I believe the Russians shelled a nuclear power plant, I'm a stupid victim of the mainstream media. Why would I believe something that was reported in the mainstream media?
Nothing is true or false because of who reports it.
He's an idiot.
The facts are what they are regardless of who reports them.
I could see the film of the shelling and the fire with my own lying eyes. Fox News, MSNBC, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal all agreed on the basic facts. Nardz has a tweet and a Telegram channel that says otherwise. So what? So Putin wouldn't do something like that?!
We may argue about the significance of the Russians shelling a nuclear power plant. We may argue about the motives of shelling a nuclear power plant. We should not argue about whether the Russian shelled a nuclear power plant and whether it started a fire--not just because Nardz has a tweet and Telegram channel that says otherwise.
Nobody should believe anything they see on the news because they saw it on the news, and no one should believe anything Nardz read in a tweet because he read it in a tweet.
The Ukrainians were in control of the nuclear plant the day before. There was shelling in the area that night. There was a fire at the plant. The next day, the Russians were in control of the plant. I've seen video of shelling happening at the plant. Those are the facts.
The stories from Fox News, MSNBC, The Wall Street Journal, and the Guardian were all consistent with those facts. Because Nardz and his tweet are not consistent with the facts strongly suggests that the reason we saw those stories on the news wasn't an elaborate hoax to make Vladimir Putin look bad. It strongly suggests that both Nardz and tweet are full of horseshit propaganda.
I think at this point it's pretty obvious that neither side is being honest about what is actually happening, and our own media is very suspect as well. Though I have noted that this weekend it's starting to turn a little. Seeing less rah rah brave Ukrainians and more Ukraine can't be saved, what do we do next. There is a middle ground between supporting Russia and supporting Ukraine. I think we need to be realists here. Russia is wrong, however, Ukraine is not a bastion of democracy either. I also don't believe Putin really wants to expand into NATO countries. He may actively try, and probably will, work to destabilize them, but I do believe the recent actions by NATO have convinced him that NATO is unlikely to roll over and play dead if he did directly invade any NATO partner.
I've heard several proposals to resurrect Lend-lease. This isn't a terrible idea, but it should be aimed at NATO partners. We have decades of advanced military equipment we have mothballed that we could lend and or lease to Poland, the Baltics, and Romania. Possibly even Finland, albeit at this time they are not NATO members. Deliveries of F-15s, F-16s, M1A1s and A-10s would greatly benefit our allies while also helping us in the eventuality of a war with Russia. We need to make it clear that these actions are the direct result of Russia invading a sovereign country.
I would also work on the diplomatic front, allow Finland and Sweden NATO entrance, making it clear this is due to secure their sovereignty as a result of Putin's actions. I spoke against NATO, and still question it's value to the US, but Putin invading Ukraine has definitely changed the calculation of non-confrantation. It would also be worth exploring the possibility of a reunification between Moldova and Romania, probably without the Transistria breakaway provinces. This would allow Moldova entrance into NATO and the EU without further actions. Moldova is probably Putin's next target. This could forestall it. The Transistria republics have been self governing for awhile and are dominated by ethnic Russians, and support Putin, at this junction in time Moldova trying to assert their dominance over them is counterproductive for the greater security of Moldova.
Putin has lost his ability to dictate to other countries. We can't allow him to dictate to us. The invasion of a sovereign nation cannot come without consequences. That doesn't require a military response, or more ineffective sanctions, but it does require us to respond. If he doesn't like these moves, he can withdraw from Ukraine immediately.
Not being very honest and promulgating pro-Putin propaganda are too different things, and most of the pro-Putin arguments don't deserve any more serious consideration than arguments promoting holocaust denial.
There is someone in this thread who is seriously arguing that the reason Putin is shelling Ukrainian cities is because he wants to limit civilian casualties. These arguments deserve no serious consideration whatsoever.
For goodness' sake, look at Nardz' comment. He's complaining about his pro-Putin Telegram channel being cut off so he can't get Putin's view out to the world! This is ludicrous, and it deserves to be called out as such.
Calling out someone for flooding the threads of a libertarian website with stupid, pro-Putin propaganda is entirely justified when someone is flooding the threads of a libertarian website with stupid, pro-Putin propaganda--regardless of whether our news media is giving us the full story.
"Not being very honest and promulgating pro-Putin propaganda are too different things, and most of the pro-Putin arguments don't deserve any more serious consideration than arguments promoting holocaust denial."
You are pathetic, Ken.
"There is someone in this thread who is seriously arguing that the reason Putin is shelling Ukrainian cities is because he wants to limit civilian casualties. These arguments deserve no serious consideration whatsoever."
This is untrue. It's either an intentional lie, or proof that Ken has gone completely psychotic.
"For goodness' sake, look at Nardz' comment. He's complaining about his pro-Putin Telegram channel being cut off so he can't get Putin's view out to the world! This is ludicrous, and it deserves to be called out as such."
Ken's argument here is apparently that anyone who wants a perspective other than that handed out by Ukraine and western governments is being ridiculous (Nota bene: Ken is so fucking stupid that he still hasn't figured out that every time I post a link the following words are copied from that link unless placed in brackets). Tony level stupidity.
"Calling out someone for flooding the threads of a libertarian website with stupid, pro-Putin propaganda is entirely justified when someone is flooding the threads of a libertarian website with stupid, pro-Putin propaganda--regardless of whether our news media is giving us the full story."
You're not calling anyone out, you're whining like a little neocon bitch that an alternative to the irrationally one sided childish bullshit you regurgitate from your corporate media masters is being provided.
Go fuck yourself, neokeNN.
You have been just as guilty of flooding the site with pro-Ukrainian propaganda. The fact is we aren't getting the truth from either side. If the shelling was nearly as bad as Ukraine has maintained, the civilian casualties would exceed the 426 that the UN has estimated have occurred to this date. You can't shell an urban area with conventional artillery and have civilian casualties that low. The casualty figures simply don't support the claims. We killed more Iraqi civilians in the first ten days of the Iraq invasion using guided munitions designed to reduce collateral damage. I don't know if Putin is or is not trying to reduce civilian casualties, but I do know the claims of indiscriminate shelling don't match the only report we have from an outside source on civilian casualties. It may be the UN hasn't been allowed into the worst areas, and that the count is much greater, but that isn't being reported either. Based upon January 2022 figures on the Russian military strength and the Ukrainian military strength, it is obvious that Russia hasn't even come close to blowing the wad on Ukraine, that it remains a very limited war on their part. Additionally, I believe it is Putin's best interest to keep civilian casualties low, as nothing is more assured to instigate further NATO interference than high civilian casualties.
We do know that when one side is doing everything to defend itself, while the other side is trying to keep the conflict limited, that the side of limitation is at a disadvantage that often works against their success. We experienced this in Iraq and Afghanistan. So, the idea that Russia is fighting a limited engagement, and as a result is having far more difficulty than they should have is entirely plausible based upon the reported casualties. Ukraine still has fixed wing aircraft. Russia outnumbers the Ukrainian air force by greater than 10 to 1. There is no other valid conclusion than Russia simply hasn't launched a full scale air war against Ukraine. Their capabilities, technology wise are similar, and no amount of training could offset a 10+ to 1 advantage 3 weeks into the conflict.
Russia has no qualms about bombing a city into rubble, and they definitely have the capability of doing it in Ukraine, so the fact that they haven't yet suggest that for some reason they've decided not to.
And it isn't SAM capabilities from the west, which have mainly been limited to man portable systems, primarily stinger missiles. The stinger has a range of just under 3 kM at altitude and a combat effectiveness of 10-75%, depending on training and estimates from it's previous use in combat (the 75% are based upon unreliable sources, as is the 10%, so the number is likely somewhere between that). Modern guided glide bombs have much greater range than this, as do air to ground missiles. This means the Russian Air Force could safely engage fixed targets safely from outside the missile range of the Ukrainian military.
Analyzing it dispassionately something definitely isn't adding up in the Russia is hell bent on destroying Ukraine and doesn't care about civilian casualties mantra that our elites are feeding us. I don't know what it is.
Maybe Ukraine is able to maintain a kill ratio high enough to offset a 10-1 disadvantage, but that seems highly unlikely. Especially considering what the combat load out of a MiG-29 or Su-27 are (6 air to air missiles each plus 150 rounds for their cannons each). To even come close to holding their own each Ukrainian aircraft would have to engage and destroy all hypothetically 7 aircraft that their armaments would allow (cannons can't even comes close to a one shot one kill ratio and 150 rounds per aircraft would be really amazing and unprecedented in air to air combat) survive all missiles fired at them, and even then, if the Russians used more than half their air force, the Ukrainians still won't have shot down all the enemies. Like I said, Russia doesn't appear to be coming even close to exerting their military might. Just to give you an idea of the absurdity of the idea that Ukraine's air force could even come close to resisting the Russian Air Force, the closest analogy would be the two day battle commonly known as the Marianas Turkey shoot. The Japanese lost 650 aircraft, while the US lost 23, however the US had a 2-1 advantage, better aircraft (the F6F and F4U fighters drastically outclassed the Zero), our pilots were experienced and efficient, while Japanese pilots were mostly half trained pilots with no combat experience, and over 100 of the Japanese losses were due to friendly fire or having to ditch at sea after we sank their carriers.
We destroyed the Iraqi air force pretty much in the first day of Desert Storm and it was a lot larger than the Ukrainian air force. Granted we had a serious advantage in technology, but also an advantage in aircraft, but not 10+ to 1. We even basically told Iraq when the war was going to start, with our deadline.
"You have been just as guilty of flooding the site with pro-Ukrainian propaganda."
----soldiermedic76
That isn't so.
You missed the discussion yesterday about how we should only be supporting the Ukrainians--because it's in America's best interests to do so--even if they're the bad guys. You may have missed the part about how it is not in America's best interests to go to war with Russia--even if Putin falling on his face in the Ukraine is in our best interests. You missed the part about how we should make friends with Stalin if eliminating the threat of Imperial Japan is in the best interests of the United States. My concern is American interests. If debunking Kremlin propaganda happens to serve the interests of Ukraine, that's great. I'm certainly not about to shy away from debunking pro-Putin stupidity just because it also makes the Ukraine look good.
I'm not sure you really disproved the sentence you quoted, because it is far from a given that supporting Ukraine is in America's best interest.
"Pro-Putin" is the new "anti-vaxxer"
Someone who consistently posts pro-Putin propaganda across multiple threads for days and days is accurately described as a pro-Putin apologist.
Bingo Nardz.
"Anti vaxxers" have been and are the stupid fucks leading our new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, even though they are a minority practically everywhere.
"Pro-Putin" are the Russian tools like Trump who think his invasion and shelling of a democratic nation was a smart move - without commenting on the dead civilians on the streets - while his own country turns into an economic basket case increasingly clamping down on its civilians.
Wait, so if oil is just really popular, are we supposed to give up on just-really-popular EVs even if it means climate doom!?
The non-Ukraine aspect of this couldn't be more of a slap in the face to your stupidity Ken. Biden subsidizes crony EVs besides Tesla and then takes all sorts of action that drives up fuel costs. Do you think that's a mistake?
It's funny how you can make the connection/extrapolation about Russia's popularity among the fleeing Ukrainians but, as Biden continues to set fire to energy infrastructure, you insisted and insist he's just doing the popular thing, the right thing.
The progressives pushing to ban Russian oil are doing so for two ideological reasons.
1) It scratches their progressive cancel culture itch.
Progressivism is all about using the coercive power of government to force Americans to make sacrifices for the greater good, as they see it, and forcing Americans to pay more for gasoline for the benefit of the Ukrainians is perfectly consistent with that.
2) It pushes their climate change agenda.
By using the government to force Americans to pay more for gas, they make buying electric vehicles much more attractive.
My position was and is that the automakers all over the world are transitioning to EVs because of market demand. When sales of all the other auto manufacturers were flat during the pandemic, Tesla sales kept rocketing skyward.
Meanwhile, the world's auto stocks have a very low p/e ratio relative to Tesla--to the point that stocks like Tesla's and Rivian's were dwarfing the market capitalization of giant auto manufacturers. In any industry, the competitors would start mimicking the business model of the leaders when the p/e ratio their stock is enjoying dwarfs that of their competitors. If Ben & Jerry's p/e went through the roof because of a new green tea flavored ice cream, all the other ice cream manufacturers would soon introduce green tea flavors of their own.
Because that effect is more than sufficient to explain the worlds' auto manufacturers transitioning to electric vehicles, does not mean that the government isn't also providing incentives--unnecessarily--or that I would support such a thing.
If electric vehicles can compete against fossil fuels on price and convenience and win, then they should win. That doesn't mean I need to support the government artificially keeping the price of oil high by restricting imports from Russia (or Venezuela). Hell, I'm also criticizing Biden for suspending drilling on public lands and killing Keystone. As it stands, oil is already up about 50% from where it was in January--without embargoing Russian oil.
Progressivism is all about using the coercive power of government to force Americans to make sacrifices for the greater good
I know. You mentioned price and convenience dismissively and then cited PE ratios during a government-imposed lockdown as proof of Tesla's true value.
"Who cares if Russia's slaughtering people and Biden's locking people in their homes, cutting off oil, and buying it from the most expensive and oppressive places possible, Tesla's PE ratio is through the roof!" - Ken
"Progressives really are the worst people." - Also Ken
"I know. You mentioned price and convenience dismissively and then cited PE ratios during a government-imposed lockdown as proof of Tesla's true value."
Weren't Tesla's markets locked down, too? There were probably more Teslas sold in locked down California and New York than there were in other states that didn't have such stringent lockdowns that lasted as long.
Meanwhile, even IF IF IF the auto manufacturers are wrong to be going electric, because they're chasing Tulip mania or the .com boom or CMOs or some such madness, I still think that's why they're doing it.
Companies do the wrong thing for reasons, too.
Weren't Tesla's markets locked down, too?
Uh, no. You do realize that it was people who were locked in their homes, right? Bars and concert venues were closed down by decree. Tesla was not. When you're locked in your home, handed extra money, and barred from interstate travel, suddenly the higher price option that doesn't gets you as far seems more reasonable. Seriously, Ken, the proggie rot in your brain is starting to smell.
Meanwhile, even IF IF IF the auto manufacturers are wrong to be going electric, because they're chasing Tulip mania or the .com boom or CMOs or some such madness, I still think that's why they're doing it.
Companies do the wrong thing for reasons, too.
"EVs are just really popular, like tulips. I've never heard of the GND. Sounds unrelated." - Ken
WTF is wrong with this guy Ken? The "progressives" calling to ban Russian oil are mostly from the GOP. It's their substitute position for criticizing Putin and another way to criticize Biden, who has obviously very successfully organized and united NATO and the western democracies against Putin's stupid aggression.
If you don't remember, Ken was last heard about 2 weeks ago predicting the Germans would never agree to Biden's request to cancel Nord Stream 2 (they did) and that therefore the only thing he cared about - Biden looking bad - would come to pass. Those goal posts were long ago relocated by Ken.
“The "progressives" calling to ban Russian oil are mostly from the GOP.”
Nancy Pelosi supports banning Russian oil. You should look up who she is on your own, but it’ll make you feel stupid.
Nothing makes Joe feel stupid.
This is something I have to bring up now. Those who have been "We can't put tariffs on china because tariffs are always bad" have seemingly transitioned to supporting a complete blockade of everything Russian. China is actively stealing from the US to tens of billions a year, yet we can't do anything in response? But Russia invades a foreign entity and we can? What is the logic here?
And yes, I do support both because I believe retaliatory tariffs are fine as I believe in modern economic game theory.
"Those who have been "We can't put tariffs on china because tariffs are always bad" have seemingly transitioned to supporting a complete blockade of everything Russian. China is actively stealing from the US to tens of billions a year, yet we can't do anything in response? But Russia invades a foreign entity and we can? What is the logic here?"
I agree with this 100%.
We diverge in terms of what we understand to be in America's best interests. I maintain that there are a number of reasons why trade with China is in our best interests, and one of them is for the same reason that I oppose progressives using the government to force American consumers to sacrifice their standard of living for higher gas prices on behalf of the Venezuelans or the Ukrainians.
Every time I drive by Walmart, the parking lot is practically full of average Americans trying to take advantage of everyday low prices coming from China. Why should the government stop Americans from doing what they think is best for their own family's standard of living--rather than make sacrifices for the people of Xinjiang?
Every time I drive to work and back, it seems like there's an Amazon delivery truck lurking around every other corner--full of inexpensive items that people couldn't afford or wouldn't buy if it weren't for them being imported from China. Why should the government stop Americans from doing what they think is best for their own family's standard of living--rather than make sacrifices for the people of Hong Kong?
The argument about Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, and the progressives using the coercive power of government to stop average Americans from pursuing their own best interests by paying less for gasoline--for the benefit of Venezuelans of the Ukrainians--is the same. When people choose to pay less for things than they would otherwise, they're choosing to buy things for their kids they wouldn't be able to afford if they didn't save money at Amazon, Walmart, and at the gas pump.
If people don't want to buy that stuff because they care more about people in other countries than they do about their own family's standard of living, I admire them, but I don't think the government should impose the progressives' values on Americans who care about their own families more than they do about people in other countries. Yes, I support trade with China. America first! If we go to war with Russia or China, all bets are off--because America first.
So you have no actual consistency here whereas I do.
Are you in denial of the loss of tens of billions in theft and the increased security costs on American business? How is that America's benefit?
Are you unaware of supply chain risk and disruption? How is foreign dependent supply chains in America's interest?
You just had 3 years of this disruption as cost, yet you continue to ignore it from a subjective view on what YOU believe to be moral or not.
In one case China is actively harming American business.
In the other case Russia is not actively harming american business, but you oddly put preference of sanctions only on the latter.
It is mind boggling.
"Are you in denial of the loss of tens of billions in theft and the increased security costs on American business? How is that America's benefit?"
If American companies wish to remain in China because they think it's worth it despite the downsides, they should be free to do so. You don't have to pick a position before you pick a principle, and libertarian capitalism is the principle here. If Amazon, Apple, Tesla, and Walmart decide it's in their best interests to operate in China. despite the downsides, who are you to tell them they can't?
You're a consumer, and that gives you the right to choose not to buy their products if they're made in China. If you're a shareholder, you have the right to vote for board members that can fire the CEO. The CEO may decide it's in their best interests to clear out of China. If Congress wants to declare war on China, you're an American with a vote, and you can argue for and vote for politicians who want that. I have no problem with any of that.
I have a problem with the government telling Americans that we should be forced to sacrifice our standard of living for the sake of the people of Hong Kong and Xinjiang. And I have a problem with the government telling Americans that we should be forced to sacrifice our standard of living for the benefit of Amazon, Apple, Tesla, and Walmart, too--since they're getting robbed in China.
The legitimate purpose of the government is to protect our rights. Rights are the obligation others have to respect our choices. The legitimate purpose of government is not to force individuals to make sacrifices for the benefit of others against their will. The American people are not here for the benefit of the government, for the benefit of the people of Hong Kong, for the benefit of the people of the Ukraine, or for the benefit of Apple. Rather, the U.S. government exists for the benefit of the American people.
Ken,
Jesse brings up valid points. China is clearly being hostile to the US economically and has been for many years. While we benefit in the short term, can we be naive enough to believe that if we just wish/pray that they change, it'll somehow happen? Or, is it more likely to get worse?
A better answer than retaliatory tariffs would be a vast reworking of our regulatory state to promote US manufacturing probably paired up with tax incentives (I know that is a dirty word for libertarians but it's better than direct subsidies) to promote manufacturing in the US by both domestic and foreign companies.
Additionally, regulatory reform for domestic resource extraction. A shift from everyone goes to university educational mindset, to an education system more similar to Germany and Finland (stress on the most motivated attending university while assisting others to get job and vocational training, not the free university part). And an all the above energy policy that allows us to be energy independent, paired with a program to update our grossly outdated energy infrastructure (could be achieved through regulatory reform and possibly tax incentives). Finally, government reform, especially entitlement reform, to shrink the size and cost of government to make the dollar stronger and curbing inflation.
Retaliatory tariffs have a poor track record, however, freer market solutions can and will make US manufacturing more competitive. It won't be overnight, but likely would be longer lasting.
I will concede that trade policy is within the legitimate purview of democracy, and that means that what the American people want should prevail--even if what they want isn't in their own best interests.
I will concede that honest libertarian capitalists can disagree about what our trade policy should be.
I will maintain, however, that our trade relationship with China continues to be in our best interests--for the reasons I've stated here as well as others.
Will you concede that Emperor Xi has spent the last couple of years insulating China's economy from American stock markets, from American banks, and from American trade--for fear of the influence American consumers have over the Chinese government?
It started with his efforts to pacify Xinjiang. After getting out of the reeducation camps, all those Uyghurs were supposed to get factory jobs. Emperor Xi wanted contract manufacturers to move into Xinjiang and hire them to give them gainful employment and keep them pacified. He couldn't get major manufacturers to move into Xinjiang in a big way because American (and European) consumers were loathe to buy anything manufactured in Xinjiang or with materials that were sourced in Xinjiang. Consumers started making manufacturers in China pledge not to use materials from Xinjiang.
Emperor Xi wants what he wants, but he can only get what Ken Shultz and other American consumers will let him have--and he hates it. Emperor Xi is scared to death of the influence American consumers and American market have over Chinese policy, and you want to cut that off?
I remember what it was like before China joined the WTO. It used to be that when people talked about Maoist rebels, they weren't just talking about their ideology. They were talking about their funding. China used to be a massive force for instability in the developing world--pushing communist revolution everywhere they could. Nowadays, they're a force for stability in the developing world. They don't want instability. They want stability so they can mine your resources and bring them to China. If you don't like the way the U.S. is involved all over the world now, you do not want to go back to the way things used to be.
If the world did to China what we're doing to Russia, Emperor Xi might lose the mandate of heaven and end up with his head on a pike--and he seems to be smarter about his own best interests than Putin. He thinks it's in his best interest to resist the lures of American trade now, and I think he's right. Why hurt ourselves for his benefit?
Jesse, US citizens paid the tariffs placed on Chinese goods and the "deal" with China that Trump heralded as a big deal has resulted in them buying practically nothing they promised to.
"China stiffed US on Trump Phase 1 trade agreement, failed to buy extra $200B in exports"
"China only achieved 57% of its promised purchases, which left it short of even its pre-pandemic levels and means China did not increase its imports from the U.S. at all. U.S. officials promised to continue pressing China to show "serious intent" to reach their purchase commitments but admitted the deal offered little leverage for enforcement, Reuters reported. "
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/china-stiffed-trump-trade-agreement-exports
The self proclaimed deal maker lost his pants and shoes to the carnival barker.
And another leftist who doesn't understand supply shifts. Nothing China makes is unique to China.
Hell yes! Crush Russia.
Nice wardrum. Is it party issue?
Go get him!
And he finds his war boner for the first time.
Probably the only way he can get it up.
He shut down pipelines and drilling in North America, which has strong environmental regulations, to buy oil from Venezuela, Russia, Nigeria, the Gulf States and now possibly Iran, who have little to no environmental regulations or human rights.
Pure genius.
It is for him. Do you know how many stacks he took to pull this one off?
Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint.
Sorry to be a free speech absolutist.
Jeff and socks hardest hit.
Love this Elon guy. I like the cut of his jib.
https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1500831499788206081?t=-NehG9W6E_TxvnIf8dvMYA&s=19
If I'm reading the situation right, major Western nations kicking the World Economic Forum to the curb right now would majorly screw them and might crash their plans for a Great Reset. The US going back to Trumpian energy independence and reining in its banks would do this.
Reining in the banks means creating strong legal protections against debanking except in the cases of certain narrow felonious behavior. If our money is mostly going to be numbers in spreadsheets, we need robust protections of our inalienable right to participate in the economy.
Maybe Bitcoin fixes this (in the current circumstances, it doesn't), but it doesn't yet. It's too complicated and isn't trusted widely enough yet, for good reasons. Robust protections in the existing system are needed, at the least as a stopgap, but also on principle.
How we'd create political will to kick the World Economic Forum to the curb is completely beyond me since they effectively own most Western leaders, including Biden and his administration. It starts, I think, with a movement to get elected officials to denounce them.
It starts, I think, with a movement to get elected officials to denounce them.
Publicly denounce them, but I can't think of a leader who would, or could (except Trump and they fixed that).
A few years ago all three heads of the major political parties here in Canada, Trudeau of the Liberals, Singh of the NDP and Scheer of the Conservatives were WEF Global Leadership grads.
Here's a Conservative MP asking a question in Parliament about the WEFs involvement, and the Speaker of the House (another Global Leadership grad) pretends his microphone went glitchy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFTVCJr8-qg
Yep.
Nobody elected the WEF, but it seems they're acting as a world government.
That's why the cheering of corporations to institute moral policy, such as credit card processors removing Russia from use, is a bad thing. WEF is one of the foremost pushing corporatist fascism, and people are being tricked into allowing it for moral reasons.
We just saw this shit used during the covid psyop, most strikingly with the Canadian truckers, and yet people are cheering it like it's now a moral Good.
Let's all moun the death of a druggie only ENB knew about
Days since ENB referenced yglasias:19
She will cite him the day after this counter stops.
That is my thought too
Please keep the counter going then. It pains me that anyone still pays attention to Yglesias.
Someone please tell me what in this article is inaccurate
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/04/nazis-ukrainian-war-russia/
https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1500713823602462724?t=wcNuFjwuIfRqi6rbu2GPsA&s=19
Back in 2017, the BBC reported on the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion’s formal collaboration with Ukraine’s national police and official sponsorship by the country’s Interior Ministry.
The main thing that has changed since then is mainstream media’s gaze.
[Link]
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/11/ultranationalism-in-ukraine-a-photo-essay
"These are heartening developments. These governments' support for letting ordinary people use private communications may not outlast this particular conflict."
Ya think?
Lol, "may not."
I'd be surprised if Reason's support for people spreading offensive material on the internet without being subjected to government-protected Good Samaritan screening lasts a week.
As soon as they find a MAGA that or opinion in support of successful policy positions they'll be back to their support of restrictions and totalitarian regimes.
"Elon Musk says his Internet service will not block Russian news sources"
Someone is going to get an invitation to a Senate committee hearing.
That would be highly entertaining.
"A U.S. trucker's convoy circled Washington, D.C., this weekend. For whatever reason—small size, poor timing, lack of actual disruption—the protest made little splash."
Or maybe FBI drivers don't work weekends.
https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1500507301094072323?t=CWljD5YqxR8gmxqusX4zSg&s=19
Remember when the White House wished a winter of death on the unvaxxed like 3 months ago?
[Link]
The “winter of severe illness and death” has ended, but the spring of severe pain at the pump and agonizing agita at the checkout line is just getting started.
https://twitter.com/MattH_4America/status/1500645661145980929?t=wVRZWsDRysOI6YDReiODZg&s=19
A few months ago your "president" wanted you to lose your job if you didn't line up for an experimental mRNA shot
Never forget what these people did to you
"What do we want?"
"World war!"
"When do we want it?"
"NOW!"
https://twitter.com/Jenna_Barnes/status/1500586897755844615?t=CarI4KiqiDrNTT22OsAu3A&s=19
Thousands of people marching on Michigan Avenue, yelling “close the sky” over #Ukraine
[Video]
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1500848185648066574?t=W4ss8YtOy9JD2xM4noAuhQ&s=19
74% of Americans support a No Fly Zone, according to new Reuters poll. This is what you get when only one fervent narrative is pumped out 24/7, dissent is stigmatized, and Zelensky -- the chief lobbyist for a NFZ -- is lionized as the modern day Churchill
[Link]
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1500850872733126658?t=b-I81YuUjEhizH6NTMLIXw&s=19
"Some 74% of Americans - including solid majorities of Republicans and Democrats - said the US and its allies in the NATO should impose a no-fly zone in Ukraine, the poll found.
An equally bipartisan 80% of Americans said the United States should stop buying Russian oil."
It's definitely reasonable to assume -- and the Reuters article suggests -- that many people who say they support a no-fly zone don't realize all that it entails. But just 2 weeks ago, large majorities didn't want a major US role in Ukraine. That changed radically and quickly.
And note there's almost zero partisan difference. These views are fully bipartisan. There was (and, to a lesser extent, still is) some heterodoxy and debate within right-wing media circles, but GOP officials themselves have been 100% pro-Ukraine along with Dems from the start.
From a Feb. 23 poll, just over 2 weeks ago: "A majority of Americans oppose a major US role in the ongoing tensions between Ukraine and Russia."
When both parties' leaders fully unite in messaging with almost all of the US corporate media, it's potent.
[Link]
I'm still hanging on to the hope that Biden Inc won't be stupid enough to engage in direct military conflict with Russia, and I am fairly confident in saying Putin most likely won't push into NATO countries because it doesn't benefit him at all to do so.
However, despite others' insistence that "market forces" will change Americans' minds about Ukraine and polling isn't worth shit, I do have my doubts. The democrats are making hay from this crisis. Popular support for action in Ukraine is rising. Biden's approval is rising on Ukraine, and it's being used to neutralize the issues that make democrats vulnerable. 64% of Americans said it was worth it to pay more for gas in order to defend freedom in another democratic country, and it was pretty bipartisan. A month ago, Biden was toxic to vulnerable democrats because of gas prices and inflation. Americans were rancorously divided. Biden's "unity" promise was bullshit. Now, Americans are rallying behind "Ukraine." He's getting his unity and he's using war to do it. If he's allowed to position himself as a stalwart defender of freedom and increase his approval numbers, he can campaign for vulnerable democrats, and a must-win election that was in the bag for Republicans a month ago, may not be such a sure thing. If Republicans don't secure congressional majorities, BBB will pass, HR1 will pass, the court will be packed, and one-party, democrat rule will be secured for good.
Yes, gas is going to hit $5/gallon, and that's a cost Americans will balk at and will threaten Biden's approval, and it'll threaten the midterms. When that happens, there will be a dead American in Ukraine. Probably one of the American vets who are planning to go fight in Ukraine. And then it's WWIII.
A few years ago, I would have said that sounds like a bonkers conspiracy theory. But I've come to realize, there is no end to how evil these fuckers are.
These are my concerns as well. Biden and the junta that runs him can fuck up any temporary lift he might get from Ukraine fever, I fully believe they are that stupid and incompetent, but that might lead to the even greater disaster of direct military intervention.
The betting odds are giving republicans even more of a chance of taking congress in the midterms than before, and Joe Biden’s election is still two years out.
I remember when George Bush’s popularity was way up during Desert Storm. But in the end, it was the economy, stupid.
If they don’t want a trouncing, they better get real smart about the economy right now.
I definitely believe you are correct in your assessment.
I'm still hanging on to the hope that Biden Inc won't be stupid enough to engage in direct military conflict with Russia, and I am fairly confident in saying Putin most likely won't push into NATO countries because it doesn't benefit him at all to do so.
Even in the relatively demoralized state of the US military, Putin pushing in to a NATO country would get his military and his country absolutely fucking wrecked. The problem becomes what Russia would do in response.
Would the world war come after the election, or before it?
74% of Americans apparently have no understanding of what a no-fly zone entails.
They don't need to understand it. They just need to support it.
Yeah, they believe it would be bloodless and Russia would roll over for it and accept it mutely. Sanctions and no-fly zone isn't the way to end the Ukrainian crisis, making it obvious to Putin that what he wants he can't achieve as long as he continues his aggression in Ukraine. Extending NATO to the last two Scandinavian countries, reunification of Moldova and Romania, plus a major upgrading of the Eastern European NATO allies, will achieve that. Make it abundantly clear that this is directly the result of Putin's invasion of sovereign nation. That we can't or won't negotiate with him on these issues unless he ceases all aggression and withdraws from all Ukrainian territory. At the same time we should be speaking with Ukraine about the future of the two breakaway provinces and Crimes. Ukraine had agreed to allow them to vote on their future back in 2014 and have not honored that agreement. Considering the high proportion of Russians in these regions and their overwhelming pro-Putin leanings, it really isn't in Ukraine's national security interests to continue to insist upon their continued dominance over these provinces. The continued conflict in these regions are one the biggest reasons Ukraine can't join NATO and the EU, also. We need realism, pragmatism and utiltarianism at this point not blind optimism.
I would support a no fly zone only if it means we can get a photo of a navy pilot flying upside down in order to flip off a mig pilot
That's classified.
See also: last two+ covid terror based on media coverage.
Er, two plus years...
Who are these people? Why do they even care?
Ken's posts are pretty indicative of their perspective
Chicago Ukrainians. Ukrainian immigrants calling for a No Fly Zone is creepy as fuck. Especially the mentality of some of them saying things like "The future of my country is being decided here." Imagine going to another country and demanding that they put their army's lives on the line for you.
Imagine immigrating to another country and then demanding that country's army fight for the country you left.
I'll give them plane fare. They can go back and fight for Ukraine themselves.
Schwab @SchwabRealHuman
There is a narrative going around that Russia is opposed to the cabal behind the WEF and its agenda. However, as recently as October 2021, Russia launched its Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution following an agreement between the WEF and the Russian government.
While the portraits of Putin and Herman Gref, the CEO of Sberbank, and the many articles listing Russia's commitments have been removed from the WEF website, this announcement remains, detailing how embedded Russia is in the techno-feudal scheme.
Sberbank by the way has morphed into a real-life version of Omni Consumer Corporation from Robocop, offering a "universe of services".
The WEF-affiliated Cyberpolygon site still has the full roster of the many Russian organizations that participated in the simulation. Collectively, these companies have invested billions in techno-feudal architecture.
https://twitter.com/SchwabRealHuman/status/1500414913042255877
Russia is also using talking points cribbed from Antifa.
Buy American good in America. Buy Russian in Russia bad for Russia.
So which is it? Does protectionism help or hinder? It can't be both.
When a foreign government puts sanctions on another country it's an act of war designed to cripple their economy, but when a government puts sanctions on itself it's an act of benevolence designed to boost the economy. Don't you understand anything?
Yes, that is the fact I am supposed to regurgitate an Econ 101 tests, but please sir, explain how it works.
It's the magic of intentions. Sanctions on another country are intended to do harm because they prevent the people of that country from trading with others. Protectionism is intended to do good because it forces the people of that country to buy domestically produced goods. See?
It's the point of view. Sanctions are viewed from the point of view of the people who are hurt because they can't buy stuff from other countries. Protectionism is viewed from the point of view of the domestic companies that prosper when the people can't buy stuff from other countries. What you're not allowed to do is switch points of view. If you did that then sanctions are good for the targeted country because the people buy domestic which creates jobs and everyone prospers, while protectionism is bad because it prevents the people from buying stuff from other countries.
It's textbook doublethink: holding two contradictory ideas in the head at the same time.
Huh:
https://pagesix.com/2022/03/06/vladimir-putin-hiding-alina-kabaeva-kids-in-switzerland/
“I have a private life in which I do not permit interference. It must be respected,” he once said. “I have always reacted negatively to those who with their snotty noses and erotic fantasies prowl into others’ lives.”
Pretty rich for a guy who used to work closely with the Stasi.
Go get him!
Putin's invasion grinds to a halt: Kyiv claims to have destroyed dozens of Russian helicopters overnight, retaken a city, and killed 11,000 troops while Russians have captured no significant territory sparking hopes Ukraine could win the war
Ukraine claims to have destroyed dozens of Russian helicopters at an airfield near Kherson overnight
Military also said it had recaptured Chuhuiv, near Kharkiv, and killed two commanders in the process
Meanwhile units in Odessa claimed to have hit and destroyed a Russian patrol ship off the coast
Experts say Russian losses becoming 'unsustainable' with no significant territory captured in recent days
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10585145/Ukraine-war-Zelensky-declares-god-not-forgive-Russians-target-civilians.html
"Experts say" you say?
Shoot the messenger much?
That was hardly a shot
"Experts say" you say?
I didn't say anything. I'm just passing a story along.
"This high-end Sonoma winery is preparing for climate change by growing grapes closer to the ocean"
https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/wine/article/This-high-end-Sonoma-winery-is-preparing-for-16975224.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result
We know this is a result of climate change since the owner, who got some land far cheaper than Napa Valley told us so.
It wouldn't possibly be a result of his PR department writing a story for the Chron and getting front page ad space for free, would it?
So they aren't worried about the ocean level?
The ocean would have to rise a whole lot to affect those coastal lands.
A bunch of whining.
So brave.
https://twitter.com/isomerik/status/1500694547994664961?t=SCII6Msl2RdAb8W2qiSH7g&s=19
As corporations and governments start coordinating their efforts (see COVID/Ukraine War), should we not consider them as a single entity? They march together for the same purpose.
https://twitter.com/ChristinaPushaw/status/1500859147981660160?t=-3F8eAIwfsV_d4-7lWhTCw&s=19
“We always sided with the data, and we rejected the narrative” - @GovRonDeSantis
https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1498491107902062592?t=p3aYSqw9p_Nad3YGkYAXYA&s=19
Most fascinating thing about the Ukraine war is the sheer number of top strategic thinkers who warned for years that it was coming if we continued down the same path.
No-one listened to them and here we are.
Small compilation [thread] of these warnings, from Kissinger to Mearsheimer.
[Links]
I like how RT is referred to as Russian state media, but the BBC isn't referred to as British State media.
NPR has entered the chat.
Will repost this:
Just a little reality, and no I still condemn Putin for his actions, but feel that we need some perspective. The media isn't giving it to us.
Putin has not come even close to throwing everything Russia has into this conflict. Don't buy the myth that Ukraine's continued resistance is a sign Russia is a paper tiger. Russia has deployed a little over 80,000 troops out of an armed forces of over 1.1 million troops. Ukraine had less than 200,000 at the start. Russia has 772 fighter aircraft, Ukraine had 69. Russia's best units are equipped with T-14 and T-95 tanks, which are comparable to our M1A1 tanks, not so much the M1A2 tanks we field now. The majority of the tanks the Ukrainians field are mostly outdated T-64, which were inferior to our retired M-60 tanks. The majority of armor the media has been showing us from the Russians are also T-64s with some T-72s. The T-64 was obsolete in the 1980s and even then were relegated to secondary divisions. Also, based upon the casualty numbers (what you can believe of them so far) this is a pretty low intensity conflict.
Russia is not using it's full air force, or even close to it. It's not even deployed a tenth of it's ground forces. The troops that have deployed appear to be second or third tier troops. It is saving it's best for if we get involved.
We can't enforce a no fly zone without Russia responding with direct military actions. To operate a no fly zone would require us to shoot down Russian fighters, and destroy their air defense artillery. That means a shooting war with Russia. As soon as we do that, expect Russian troops to invade the Baltic states, and their first line troops, which aren't engaged right now, to roll across the Polish Frontier. Cruise missiles will start hitting targets throughout Europe. Russia also has one of the largest submarine fleets in the world, yes the majority are diesel-electric boats, but modern diesel subs are nearly as good as nuclear subs and more than adequate to destroy commercial shipping. And their air force will confront our air forces in Europe.
Finally, many are talking energy sanctions against Russia, to destroy their economy. This may be the only thing Russia will respond to, and hurt them the worst, however, we and our allies are dependent on Russian energy exports at this time and our leaders don't appear to be serious about weaning us off of this. Alternative energy sources would take at least a decade to make up for the loss in energy from Russia. And that is only if we stop being idiots and use nuclear as base power. It would destroy our economy along with theirs. You think gas prices are high now, wait until we cut off 10% of the global energy supply. Additionally, it will drive the price of everything else up even more. There are already parts of the country nearing $7/gallon. The national average was over $4/gallon on Friday (latest numbers haven't been released, but it's assuredly higher today). Our stock market is bearish.
The second thing to consider is that sanctions don't actually stop wars. In fact, they often lead to war. We are taught that Japan attacked on December 7th for no reason. That isn't the truth. The attacks on December 7th were partially (if not considerably) the result of US sanctions against Japan. Additionally, one of the reasons Germany invaded other countries was to decrease the impacts of possible sanctions from western Europe. Rather than prevent wars, sanctions give militaristic tyrannies more incentive to start wars, as the more resources they control, the lower the impact of sanctions. Also, don't buy the Chamberlain analogy. England and France's mistake wasn't in negotiating with Germany, but in trusting Germany and not preparing for war. They did nothing to deter Germany, even as Germany built up troops on the Polish border. They didn't send Poland equipment or deploy troops to Poland.
We rightly feel for the Ukrainian people. We rightly condemn Putin and Russia for their actions, but we also need to be realistic about the dangers of our actions and any further escalation. Don't buy into the jingoism. Don't listen to the same talking heads that were wrong about Iraq and Afghanistan. The same ones who told us those two conflicts would be short and relatively bloodless are the same ones who are driving the current narrative. If we do end up in a shooting war with Russia, I will support our troops 100%, but until then, I will continue to maintain that war with Russia is the worst thing we could do right now.
aye
Well put.
Amen.
Actually having Biden as president is the worst thing we can do right now
Biden? You mean the Lion of Kiev? Who do you think has been working for the last month coordinating the united NATO and western democracy response? Trump purposefully and with Putin's approval, left those alliances in tatters.
"The flurry of activity the last few days was actually months in the making. U.S. intelligence first noticed signs last fall of Moscow’s troop movements and began quietly alerting allies to the possibility of an invasion. Their warnings were met with widespread skepticism, as some European nations in particular did not believe Putin would go through with it. The United States’ consistent message back was: We hope you’re right but we can’t take the chance that it’s not.
Before long, the White House stopped whispering. In a concerted and highly unusual effort, it began loudly warning about Putin’s aggressive behavior. The strategy to take intelligence public in almost real-time was crafted by Burns and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines and quickly endorsed by the president who thought the effort might rattle Putin, a former KGB chief known to safeguard his secrets. It wasn’t seen as a guaranteed deterrent but a possible mechanism to slow down the Russian leader and perhaps make him reconsider.
Slowly and painstakingly, reluctant allies were brought on board. White House officials said that an agreement in principle to halt the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, that would supply Germany and others with Russian natural gas, was made before new German Chancellor Olaf Scholz even arrived in Washington for his meeting last week. While Scholz danced around the topic at a White House news conference, the two governments had already reached a general deal on suspending the pipeline in light of a Russian invasion. And the White House was heartened when Germany went one step further over the weekend and, in a historic step, pledged military assistance to Ukraine.
Critics have blamed the administration for being too slow to react to Putin’s aggressive behavior, or for not slapping sanctions on the Kremlin before his tanks rumbled across the Ukrainian border. But Biden and his aides have since levied historic punishments on Putin and his economy, making Russia a global pariah and reaffirming the Western alliance with a vigor not seen since the Cold War. Whether their resolve can outlast Putin’s is another question entirely."
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/01/biden-white-house-russia-putin-00012696
The Lion of Kyiv.
Holy shit.
If you weren’t convinced Joe’s a fifty center before, that should do the trick.
"Remember how Putin invaded the Ukraine back when Trump was president. Thank goodness a strong leader like Biden is in place to make sure that doesn't happen" - t. Joe Friday and Politico
Remind me again, Joe. Was it Biden or Trump who stopped shipping arms to the Ukraine and switched from North American to Russian Oil?
Mother, why would Putin create a crisis when Trump was doing his work for him against the Ukraine, NATO, and the EU?
Check your sources:
"According to the AFPM, imports of Russian crude oil have increased since 2019, when the US imposed sanctions on Venezuela’s oil industry. US refiners also temporarily boosted Russian imports last year after Hurricane Ida disrupted oil production in the Gulf of Mexico."
Trump didn't urge stopping Nordstream until it was 95% complete. They ignored him.
"A 2015 joint report by the Brooking Institution, the Atlantic Council and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs urged the West to bolster deterrence in Ukraine "by raising the risks and costs to Russia of any renewed major offensive."
That would require providing direct military assistance so that Ukraine is better able to defend itself, the report stated. While it called on NATO members to be part of that strategy, it also said the U.S. government needed to provide Ukraine with $3 billion in military assistance over the next three years.
Yet in 2018, with Donald Trump as president, the U.S. reversed course and agreed to provide Ukraine with $47 million worth of lethal weapons, which included 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers....
According to Catherine Croft, who served as Ukraine director at the U.S. National Security Council, Trump had viewed Ukraine as a corrupt country and believed it should pay for the weapons itself, Foreign Policy magazine reported in 2019.
As well, a condition was placed on the sale of the Javelin anti-tank missiles: They could only be stored in western Ukraine, away from the conflict, to be used as a deterrent.
Then, in 2019, Trump ordered a freeze on a $400-million package of military assistance to Ukraine that had been approved by Congress. The freeze came days before Trump's phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, where he pressured the Ukrainian leader to investigate Joe Biden, a presidential front-runner at the time, and his son Hunter Biden. It was this request that led to Trump's first impeachment.
The aid, though, was released on Sept. 11, only after a whistleblower's complaint about Trump's pressure on Ukraine had surfaced and a few days after Democrats in Congress opened the investigation...."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/obama-trump-biden-ukraine-military-aid-1.6371378
If you want to brag about Trump's limp aid, have at it. None of our presidents did much to bolster Ukraine's defense. A couple of them did that thinking they didn't want to escalate a possible conflict with Russia. One of them went along with a weak congressional response, as long as he though he could benefit personally from it.
Mother, why would Putin create a crisis when Trump was doing his work for him against the Ukraine, NATO, and the EU?
Do you even hear yourself? How the fuck does that even make sense to you?
You're saying, Putin wanted to invade Ukraine and seize chunks of it, but didn't do it while Trump was in power, and had to wait until Biden was in power, because Biden is tough and wouldn't let him.
Did you hit your fucking head?
Plus, from your own fucking link:
"In 2014, during Ukraine's battle to regain control of the Crimean Peninsula seized by Russia, then-Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko pleaded with Washington for more lethal military assistance, including Javelin anti-tank missiles.
However, despite bipartisan support from U.S. lawmakers to send lethal aid, the Obama administration would only commit to non-lethal support, which included equipment such as body armour, night goggles and helmets.
Then-president Barack Obama, while providing millions of dollars in aid, resisted sending lethal support, fearing that such a military buildup might provoke Putin to strike."
Hey Joe, who was Obama's VP?
Anyway, what does it say about Trump?
Yet in 2018, with Donald Trump as president, the U.S. reversed course and agreed to provide Ukraine with $47 million worth of lethal weapons, which included 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers.
According to Catherine Croft, who served as Ukraine director at the U.S. National Security Council, Trump had viewed Ukraine as a corrupt country and believed it should pay for the weapons itself, Foreign Policy magazine reported in 2019.
As well, a condition was placed on the sale of the Javelin anti-tank missiles: They could only be stored in western Ukraine, away from the conflict, to be used as a deterrent.
He wasn't wrong and sounds pretty damn prudent to me.
"As for the current Biden administration, it, too, has been subject to bipartisan criticism for dragging its heels on military aid to Ukraine. In early December, 22 House lawmakers wrote a bipartisan letter to Biden, urging him to immediately provide the military aid requested by Ukraine — including Stinger and Javelin missiles, drones, electronic jamming gear, radars, ammunition and medical supplies."
Since I don't have an enourmous war boner like you, Joe, I'm fine with what Biden did here.
“ The Lion of Kyiv.”
I figured it out guys, Joe Friday IS Joe Biden.
Seems about right.
Should call him Joe Brandon from now on.
Well said. Despite my age I remember what it was like to be cannon fodder for silly fuckers in politics, the press, etc who think they're brilliant strategists because they have maps to play with. And always be careful about taking advice from people who will not bear the consequences of a bad decision.
Despite my age I remember what it was like to be cannon fodder for silly fuckers in politics
Between your age and service, you're in the minority. A good chunk of the cheerleaders are public union educators who get skittish when kids make poptart handguns.
I can add this, for the tactical supergeniuses talking about Ukrainians sneaking out and attacking T95s, T14s. Armor is more vulnerable in urban settings where the coax MG and main gun don't have stand-off, the thermal and NVG are less effective due to reduced line of sight, and opposition fighters have more hiding locations, ambush locations, mining/IED locations. Armor is less vulnerable in rural settings, especially if able to get partially hull down, and where the Infantry often seen riding can provide close security should opposition fighters manage to somehow get past the thermal, NVG capabilities of the tanks. I dislike armor, but it is impressive and damned scary in combat. Agreed with your take, Russia has not committed its full forces, and hopefully will not. What Putin has opted for is shitty, but the shallow, emotion driven, ignorant horseshit coverage in the media is near-criminal.
Yup. I don't feel a need to have a strong opinion on this beyond: war sucks, Putin is being fairly evil (and possibly making some bad mistakes), we need to stay the fuck out of it.
One thing that needs to be brought up as well is that Putin doesn't necessarily have to occupy Ukraine to win. Assuming he avoids NATO involvement, the message "Induct the Ukraine into the EU/NATO at your own peril." has already been sent. Even if they join NATO, he can antagonize at asymmetric expense.
Russia's/Putin's demands/goals have remained the same for months, if not years:
-no NATO, via constitutional amendment
-official Ukrainian recognition of Crimea as Russian and Luhansk+Donetsk as independent
-end of war in Luhansk+Donetsk
These strike me as "silly" things to keep fighting and/or die for. They're absolutely not things Americans should go to war for, or even waste money on.
And I demand with Zelensky that Putin go fuck himself Nardz. He's the dictator of Russia, not the president of Ukraine.
I demand that you suck-start a shotgun.
I second.
I don't totally disagree with your second and third points. We should be speaking frankly with Ukraine about the future of those provinces. As for the NATO and EU, Ukraine's continued assertion of power over these regions is one of their biggest stumbling blocks to join either of these organizations.
As for your first point, I'm not sure what the best route would be. Maybe an affiliate membership in the EU as opposed to a full membership but that may be off the table for now. I think at this point our best option is to contain Russia and play for time, while leaving open the diplomatic door. Putin isn't a young man. We should be planning on how to deal with a post-Putin Russia.
“We should be planning on how to deal with a post-Putin Russia.”
So you support assassinating Putin?
/sarc
The best route for us would be the US pulling out of NATO, but since our Davos/WEF rulers will never give up their attack dog and an excuse to gut the middle class for their own enrichment, a slightly less aggressive and hostile NATO approach would be nice.
Sure Nardz, why waste our money on an institution which has helped keep the peace in formally at-war-all-the-damn-time Europe for 76 years until now, after a US President who wanted it gone so his buddy Putin could romp. Numerous Trump administration officials have quoted him as saying he would exit NATO in a 2nd term. Putin fixed that. NATO has new life after everyone experienced in real time why it exists.
Sure Nardz, why waste our money on an institution which has helped keep the peace in formally at-war-all-the-damn-time Europe for 76 years until now
Jesus fuck, you really are getting senile.
The Balkan war wasn't all that long ago, you moron.
Thanks Red for reminding of the geographically limited war in the Balkans which NATO took care of.
Imagine being so stupid you constantly bitch about US military spending and then turn around and pretend that NATO (and not the US military) has kept the peace for the last 80 years.
His kind has literally been complaining about it for the last 60 years.
Designate, they work together, including bases in favorable locations.
While I supported pulling out of NATO in the past, it would probably be the worst move, for global peace, at this time or in the near future. I am not buying Putin's justification for invading, it's barely better than blaming Poles for blowing up a German radio station. Maybe it factored into his equation, maybe it didn't, but it is probably the only thing keeping him out of Poland and the Baltic states next. If the next regime is more open than we should maybe consider it. This doesn't mean we didn't make mistakes in the past 30 years in our approach to Russia and NATO expansion, however, pulling out after Putin's invasion of a sovereign nation to inflict his desires on that country, would compound our past mistakes. I know you won't agree with me, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation we are now facing. Isolationism is not anymore valid a foreign policy than militarism is.
+1
S76....One conclusion I draw, based on 12 says of performance. In a straight up conventional fight, Russia would be absolutely creamed by NATO. Russia read America's war-fighting war book, but our equipment is light years ahead. It would be next to a 'turkey shoot' in a conventional battle.
I don't want a conflict between Russia and NATO. And it is wrong for the US to send weapons directly to Ukraine.
The no-fly zone is ridiculous.
I think we are running the risk of underestimating Russian military might as we are watching a limited engagement by the Russian military with mostly second and third string troops and trying to draw a conclusion based upon the results. The Russians aren't using their most advanced fighters and tanks, they haven't even committed more than 10% of their military and with current troop deployments, the Ukrainian army still slightly outnumber Russian forces on the ground, not to mention Ukrainian partisans. Yes, the Russians own a lot more outdated equipment than the best stuff, but they are much more capable than what three weeks of this limited engagement would suggest.
I believe we would win a conventional war, but I think it would be costlier than many people realize.
Additionally, how do we end it, even if it remains conventional (a highly dubious assumption)? Invading Russia has never been an easy proposition, even with superior troops and equipment. Both Germany and France had superior equipment and troops when they invaded, and both failed. A purely defensive war would likely be lengthy and costly and likely not result in anything but a return to the status quo.
In summary, we should take the Ukrainian success to date with a large grain of salt, overconfidence has almost always led to disaster on the battlefield.
The curious logic of "Buy American"
This is a profoundly stupid take.
Why?
https://twitter.com/The_Real_Fly/status/1500646030089592837?t=qw0waO3eS9wKK2VilZmQgA&s=19
PELOSI SAYS CONGRESS INTENDS TO ENACT THIS WEEK $10 BILLION IN AID FOR UKRAINE
Wow, that's +$4b from last week. Quite the stimmy
Bidenflation is a bitch
It's transitory. It'll be replaced by Kamalaflation after the midterms.
"we were all taken by surprise when China attacked Argentina"
Argentina is a country in America. . .
We are all Ukrainians now; we will all be Argentines then.
Don't cry for me, Argentina
- heard on a Kiev street 🙂
Inflation is global you twits, not only in the US.
And? Did someone say it was only in the US?
Zeb, so it's Biden's fault that the world is experiencing inflation after an international pandemic?
Interesting theory.
Is it Maduro's fault that Venezuela is experiencing inflation after an international epidemic?
Your strawman is the only one espousing that theory.
Have you considered the fact that most countries in the world have made the same colossal fuckups as the US has in the past two years? That might just have something to do with it.
"so it's Biden's fault that the world is experiencing inflation after an international pandemic?"
Shutting down the North American oil and gas industry and relying on foreign imports, jacked the price globally months before Ukraine, which massively inflated shipping costs worldwide. Just one of several of Joe's fuckups leading to global inflation.
Mother, US oil production sagged in 2020 because of Covid and is increasing since. Biden hasn't shut down any active oil production. Cut the BS.
Who do you even think your tricking? Either you're amazingly ignorant of the news or think that we are.
With a pen stroke, President Joe Biden cancels Keystone XL pipeline project
Biden Administration Halts New Drilling in Legal Fight Over Climate Costs
Biden's order to halt new drilling on federal lands would export New Mexican jobs
Biden suspends oil-drilling leases in Alaska
I mean Biden's done nothing but "shut down active oil production".
It takes a special kind of retard to post your bullshit.
Mother, you claimed US production was cut by Biden. It wasn't. You have cited lease permits and a pipeline for Canadian oil. There are presently about 9,000 US drilling permits granted and not being used.
Your flat out lying. Every single one of those articles I linked to outlines how.
Seriously though, it takes some balls to keep shilling a phony narrative despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. So kudos to your boss, he trained you well.
If you think so Mother, link it. Nothing you provided addresses recent, current, or planned oil production. I have provided my evidence multiple times in various threads and it is not disputable.
High point was 2019 at something like 12 billion barrels. Dropped in 2020 to about 11.28 and 11.18 in 2021 with projected 2022 of about 11.8. That's covid and the oil industry gearing back up, not any cuts by Biden. In fact, another article I posted discussed the growing inefficiency of fracking and the oil companies reluctance to pump more because of returns. It's not Biden or Keystone.
>>>Though pitches as an attempt to ban misinformation, the new law actually prohibits various types of truthful language
you're the one with the platform shouldn't you be yelling from a mountaintop about how "misinformation" is the lie?
They want to keep the platform.
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1500855750016577536?t=89LlXIPTvhH8xlL3hDO97Q&s=19
I’m pretty sure this unhinged slob believes what he’s really saying—that Russia’s invasion had nothing at all to do with national interest as it perceives it, and everything to do with being The Bad Guys. No wonder US foreign policy is pure trash.
"AVindman
Nope. It’s because you and your pro-Putin party encouraged Putin to invade, by cheerleading him. Worse yet, you undermined @POTUS efforts to signal punishing costs… you undermined U.S. efforts deter the war. You have blood in your hands. The American people will not forget."
To the extent I have a dog in this fight (aside from the pro-American position that focus on Russia is a distraction from China), it’s in favor of bringing back a sober, interests-based view of international relations. We’re in the age of comic book movies and it’s gotta stop.
We’re in the age of comic book movies and it’s gotta stop.
Had to remind my MIL that, Bush The Greater did next to nothing after Habyarimana was assassinated, that Carter's protecting teh Shah from violent deposition still haunts us, that all of that happened in her lifetime and, if it happens again, she almost certainly won't live to see the end of it. The real question would be if she gets closer to seeing the end than her kids and grandkids do or not.
I suspect the shitty movies have less to do with this than the grotesque states of affairs that are education and 'news' media.
I really, really hate that guy.
Removing Alexander Vindman from a position of strategic importance to the US may have been the best thing Trump ever did. He sounds dumber by the day.
Not Robbers, Vindeman and others were removed for testifying to the truth that Fatso tried to extort Zelensky to start an investigation of Biden - he pointedly did not care if it was completed as he wanted the headline and the record - or he wouldn't get the money for weapons Congress had voted to give him. He put Guliani in charge of trying to gin up the Russian lie that the Ukraine had involved itself in our election in 2016, not Putin (since proved by the GOP led Senate Intel Comm Report - read it).
From weakening the 2016 GOP platform for Ukrainian support, to siding with Russia repeatedly against the Ukraine while trying to weaken NATO and the EU, Trump worked hand in hand with Putin.
Wipe your mouth,dude.
"the GOP led Senate Intel Comm Report - read it"
You mean the Senate Intel Report that McCain created based solely on a fraudulent investigation cooked up by a guy that Soros hired?
Did you know that the guy who frauded that report the Senate one was based on has since been arrested for it?
Of course John McCain knew it was fraudulent, and he didn't stop there. In his book, "The Restless Wave," McCain confirmed that he was the person who gave Comey the now bogus Russian dossier, too.
Were you genuinely ignorant of all this, or did you just hope we were?
The report came out in 2020 you twit, or a couple of years after McCain was dead. The Committee was led by the majority GOP and it was released in the summer of 2020. Guess what they found? Trump colluded with the Russians in 2016 to help his campaign and Putin personally approved helping him through stealing DNC emails and releasing them through his tool Assange.
Here you go:
"The Committee’s investigation totaled more than three years of investigative activity, more than 200 witness interviews, and more than a million pages of reviewed documents. All five volumes total more than 1300 pages."
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-releases-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report
"The Committee’s investigation totaled more than three years of investigative activity, more than 200 witness interviews, and more than a million pages of reviewed documents. All five volumes total more than 1300 pages."
So fucking what? It was a big report?
And 90% of it had nothing to do with Trump, but focused on the fact that Russia only spent 150k on Facebook ads and other gems.
The report came out in 2020 you twit, or a couple of years after McCain was dead.
McCain was the committee chair when they investigated Trump you dishonest fuck, and the report you just cited states "no direct evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia was found".
And since the report was released, the source on Trump/Russia collusion for that report has been arrested for falsifying the evidence.
Who are you trying to fool here, Shrike?
Mother, you quote Rubio's ass and face saving comment. The facts lead to an obvious conclusion directly opposite of his statement. Read it.
The sources for the collusion were not sourced form one witness. Read it.
https://twitter.com/axios/status/1500878268953731073?t=hnAWmFSBCO2fbvWVE6ENlA&s=19
Because of the Russian war in Ukraine, much of the world is set to experience weaker growth and higher inflation than seemed likely mere weeks ago.
[Link]
The last 14 months of inflation is Russia fault
Psaki literally said something similar. And Fauci is still claiming the vax stops spread.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/the-leaders-are-still-lying
Vaccines do stop the spread Elvis. You have to catch it to spread it and the un-vaxxed have been and continue to lead in both blue and red states in new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, even though they are a minority almost everywhere in America.
Cut the lies.
The virus will go through the population no matter how many people are vaccinated.
See New Zealand stats.
80% vaxxed and world record case numbers.
See US stats:The un-vaxxed have been and continue to lead in both blue and red states in new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, even though they are a minority almost everywhere in America.
If the vaccinated are getting infected, they failed to stop the spread.
Red Rocks, who told you that vaccines were perfect defense and would stop you from getting Covid? Nobody at the CDC, Fauci, or anyone else who knows what they are talking about said that. The Covid vaccines were at best expected to be about 90% effective at that task and as it is excellent at limiting your symptoms if you did get it.
You're operating on a false premise - vaccines WILL limit your likelihood of getting Covid and WILL decrease your chances of ending up in the hospital or croaking, by a lot.
"who told you that vaccines were perfect defense"
If you received three polio vaccinations in a year and a half and still caught polio, it would be pretty evident that it was about as effective as snake oil.
This isn't some one off either. A majority of the vaccinated are still susceptible.
Forget about a perfect defense, it's not even a defense at all.
You know what vaccines do stop development of a disease? Measles, mumps, rubella, typhus, HPV, smallpox, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, polio, mumps, measles, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, HiB, chickenpox, rotavirus, influenza, meningococcal disease, pneumonia and many, many more.
The whole useless and dangerous Covid mRNA enterprise has been a graft engine for funneling taxpayers dollars to Pfizer and back into politicians pockets, while killing people.
Yeah Mother, it is just so unfair that modern science could not come up with something that would be completely fool proof, keep us from getting sick forever, and help us lose weight too!
What a fucking spoiled brat! This is the real world jackass. Guess what? People still die of cancer. Yeah, that's right, those cheating motherfucking scientists and doctors are ripping us off I guess, because LIFE IS SO UNFAIR!!!!!!
Red Rocks, who told you that vaccines were perfect defense and would stop you from getting Covid?
Joe Friday
March.7.2022 at 1:42 pm
Vaccines do stop the spread Elvis.
LOL.
Yeah Mother, it is just so unfair that modern science could not come up with something that would be completely fool proof, keep us from getting sick forever, and help us lose weight too!
Nuclear-level cope here.
Hey fuckface, if the vaccine is "safe and effective," and COVID is the Black Plague, why are infants not allowed to get it yet?
"Yeah Mother, it is just so unfair that modern science could not come up with something that would be completely fool proof, keep us from getting sick forever, and help us lose weight too!"
Look at those goalposts move, but just having a covid vaccine that would actually prevent covid would be nice. And it's doable going the protein route as China's effective vaccine has proven.
But the Pfizer jab your pushing doesn't even do that.
"What a fucking spoiled brat! This is the real world jackass. Guess what? People still die of cancer."
Seeing how you're getting supermad I guess you realize that you lost the argument, Shrike.
And hey, if there was a mandatory cancer vaccine that made people sick and didn't actually stop cancer whatsoever, I'd criticize that too.
Anyway, you're too stupid to be here. Have you tried Reddit?
Vaccines do stop the spread Elvis.
Effective vaccines do. The COVID vaccines do not.
None of that demonstrates that the vaccines stop the spread of this virus.
Countries that are 90%+ vaccinated still have had significant cases. Stop lying.
Zeb, who told you that vaccines were perfect defense and would stop you from getting Covid? Nobody at the CDC, Fauci, or anyone else who knows what they are talking about said that. The Covid vaccines were at best expected to be about 90% effective at that task and as it is excellent at limiting your symptoms if you did get it.
You're operating on a false premise - vaccines WILL limit your likelihood of getting Covid and WILL decrease your chances of ending up in the hospital or croaking, by a lot.
I was vaccinated and still caught COVID, as did millions of others. Your vaccine failed to stop infection.
If polio and smallpox were judged on these results, we'd still be dealing with outbreaks. There's a reason that no vaccine has ever been successfully produced for a coronavirus, and still hasn't.
ed Rocks, who told you that vaccines were perfect defense and would stop you from getting Covid? Nobody at the CDC, Fauci, or anyone else who knows what they are talking about said that. The Covid vaccines were at best expected to be about 90% effective at that task and as it is excellent at limiting your symptoms if you did get it.
You're operating on a false premise - vaccines WILL limit your likelihood of getting Covid and WILL decrease your chances of ending up in the hospital or croaking, by a lot.
You copypasta'd this already, you coping midwit.
Did you see the now suspect that there has at least been one case now of whitetail deer transmitting COVID to humans, so I guess we now need to vaccinate the hundreds of millions of wild whitetail deer in North and South America (yes, there's whitetail deer on both continents not to mention all the introduced populations throughout the rest of the world). Shouldn't be to hard, I mean the woods are full of tens of millions of deer hunters every fall and they manage to harvest maybe 5% annually and despite more days in the field as most states have increased the length of the season only 43% of hunters are successful, so tracking down and vaccinating every whitetail won't be a problem at all.
Indeed soldier, that probably is a problem in some parts of the country. Stump broke does?
Keep up the good work!
Facts R Mac. This board needs them badly.
Why?
Inflation is global Rev. Read anewspaper or something, please.
https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1500853791909978117?t=X82UB9MxvT6fis9rJKydNw&s=19
Remember when the leader of a major western country jailed truck drivers and stole their money for disagreeing with him about a virus that magically no one cares about anymore
Pepperidge Farm remembers
Yeah Nardz, your guy Putin would kill them.
So that makes what Trudeau did okay? Go fuck yourself, Joe.
https://twitter.com/BryanDeanWright/status/1500849311512289286?t=qXTqpUm4mT9CQR4sjmac-w&s=19
The Biden Regime knows that gas prices are accelerating at a rate that leads to revolutions.
This pivot from Psaki isn’t policy. It’s panic.
[Link]
https://twitter.com/TheLoyalCanadi1/status/1500624738649100297?t=XviNDqINvgfpoaMqL8VIvQ&s=19
They're not even trying to hide it anymore.......
[Pic]
>>Why was the Food and Drug Administration so slow to warn of possibly tainted baby formula?
something something baby blood.
https://twitter.com/kristenmag/status/1499070044340305923?t=JisbVzNvYYTxnl3Rasmfgw&s=19
Let’s take a stroll through our memory lane of #BadCovidRules
Do you remember when they boarded up the basketball hoops?
Never forget.
And never let it happen again.
[Links]
Nope. Why don't ya'll live in places that are *reasonable*.
How's the weather in Moscow Nardz?
PS If you are here, hopefully you won't get the Paris 1945 head shaving treatment when your country Russia loses and implodes.
And hopefully you'll get the Frank Little treatment regardless of how it turns out, tankie.
You're willing to suck any dick they tell you to, aren't you? Is Fauci jealous now that you're all over Zelensky's knob?
Cronut, keep your sex fantasies to yourself. No one wants to share that with you, including the photoshop you have of Fauci with a whip and black stockings.
That was awful. Stick to reciting talking points. Joyless cunts like you suck at humor.
This one's easy - no national mandates and 2/3 of the country got on with life and stopped masking or worrying about vaccinations over a year ago so there's nothing for those of outside the Blue enclaves to protest about.
Yup.
And even most of those blue enclaves are trying to put the genie back in the bottle as quickly as they can, and pretending it never happened.
You misread the data soldier. Yes, due to the Omicron surge petering out and no new ones on the horizon that threaten like it or Delta (BA2 has mixed reviews) both the public and the CDC are ready for judicious relaxing mask standards. They did this previously - with Biden - in April 2021 - and then the Delta variant hit, so it is not unprecedented and not because the majority of Americans - who did get vaccinated by the way - suddenly agree with the crackpots here. Y'all are trying to get in front of a parade you just joined, as if you'd been leading it all along.
You shitlibs using "y'all" doesn't make you sound homespun and authentic, it makes you sound like hayseeds.
Elitist cosplay, like when candidates visit a farm or small town ball game.
Sort of like Crooked Hillary carrying hot sauce in her purse...
Warren's "im'ma have me a beer!" comes to mind
Red, I am south of the mason dixon line, managed a cattle farm for 15 years and run a small construction company where I interact with guys who mostly don't have MBA's, all day.
PS I don't swing a hammer anymore but my hands look like I do, though writing checks doesn't require Bag Balm in the evenings.
"Red, I am south of the mason dixon line, managed a cattle farm for 15 years and run a small construction company where I interact with guys who mostly don't have MBA's, all day."
hard LMAO
Do you also fly to work on a bald eagle, punch commies in the face, and spend most of your time trying to wade through piles of money to get home and fuck your supermodel wife? Since we are talking about things you are making up, after all
If by judicious you mean decision makers motivated by perception and image (and with at least one eye fixed on political advantage), and the compliant public looking for emotional guidance and directive, then sure.
This newfound government tolerance for the right to encrypt is something to engrave on our eternal memories. It’s bound to die out as it proves to be tomb much of a threat to their censorship plots.
These Nazi scum Russian propagandists have been threatening and pushing for war against Ukraine for years and now that it's happened they have to pretend it isn't a war:
"The fact that the Russian military is experiencing heavy losses during the invasion of Ukraine seemed to be of little consequence to Skabeeva, who for years publicly agitated for war against Ukraine. She was, however, overtly angered by the messages, which serve as a reminder of the war’s consequences.
Meanwhile in Moscow, the Russian government has adopted new legislation to prevent the dissemination of “fake” information about the invasion, with state media describing worldwide condemnation of the Kremlin’s deeds as “informational carpet bombing.” Across state television, Putin’s attempted blitzkrieg against Kyiv is being entirely overshadowed by the Western response to the assault on Ukraine, including U.S. sanctions, which Russian lawmaker Alexey Nechayev described as “the blitzkrieg of the West against the Russian economy.”
Popular state TV pundit Karen Shakhnazarov conceded on Friday that, “It seems to me that we’re losing the information war. Our info-operation wasn’t thoroughly prepared, unlike the Ukrainian side—and whoever is standing behind them.” He, too, complained about getting trolled with strange phone calls. “By the way, I got a call from Zelensky. Well, at least it was his voice on my phone. Either a recording or somebody impersonating him. Other people are getting those too,” he said. “They’re well prepared, with hundreds of thousands or millions of templates for things that are being disseminated.”
Appearing on Soloviev’s show on Thursday, Alexander Khinshtein, head of the State Duma’s information committee, said, “This is a blatant, overt information war that is being waged for hearts and minds, to make people not only abroad, but within Russia to believe in these horrors and to experience fear, panic and hatred, to start a psychological war over here.” He went on to describe “unprecedented” cyber attacks against Russia’s “infrastructure and its government websites,” claiming that they are “two to three times more impactful than any prior cyberattacks Russia experienced.”
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/putin-henchmen-rage-getting-trolled-174455709.html
Mostly peaceful cross-border youth exchange.
But Ken hasn't spent the last week flooding a libertarian website with pro-Putin propaganda!
Nardz has, and so have you.
Incidentally, are you still maintaining that the reason the Russians are shelling Ukrainian cities is because they want to limit civilian casualties?
You spelled "poutine" wrong.
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
I just wonder what Russian prank calls sound like?
"Is your wooden, sawdust-filled icebox running? Well, you better go catch it! Caribou inside is trying to escape!"
"Do you have Peter The Great in a can? Well, you better let him out, along with millions of inmates in Gulag!"
Russian Bartender receives phone call: "Everyone, Is there an Al K. Holic here?" (*The whole bar responds.*)
Russian POWs are claiming that they were told that invading Ukraine was in response to Ukraine being taken over by Nazis. The fact is neither country is fascist, they are both corrupt oligarchies, albeit, Russia is dominated by a despot, but he was legally elected with overwhelming majorities into every office he has been elected to. The stupidity of comparing this to world war 2 cannot be overstated. They can only be believed by simpletons with no understanding of history or current geo-political realities.
Hey, it's not like they're putting anything on the line. Their feelz are far more valuable than peasant lives, logical thinking, or truth.
Just ask Ken.
You forgot to state whether you still believe that the reason the Russians are shelling Ukrainian cities is because they want to limit civilian casualties.
Certain members of my family are ashamed I exist (except when they need my help with something) because they're progressives and I don't endorse the shit they say at family gatherings. I don't even say much about it, I just don't cheer them on. Whether your family is ashamed of what you think is a poor measure of the validity of your worldview.
Ha. Ha.
In Russia, jokes tell you.
And Iraqis and Afghanis will welcome us as liberators. I bought into the jingoism to my shame in 2003, but have learned since to question the narrative our upper military and media are using, especially when they are agreeing.
Ignore me!,
I doubt your worldview is anything to be ashamed of.
If you went around flooding the threads of a libertarian website with pro-Putin propaganda--and your family was ashamed of you for that--they might be right to be ashamed of you!
Beneficial immigrants exercising their right to bear arms.
So the answer is that you continue to maintain that the reason Putin is shelling the cities is to minimize civilian casualties--just like you were before.
Your insistence that Putin is shelling the cities to minimize civilian casualties remains what it is.
You're a Putin-apologist and/or an idiot.
Geiger is apparently blind or too dumb to fish. For once Ken is right. Nardz is a compete Russian tool.
Good luck in postwar Moscow Nardz.
Yeah Geiger, because Putin isn't really bombing civilians while invading a democratic nation. Who would believe he'd really do that, right?
Asshole Joe doesn’t know what jingoism means.
I'm labeling you as a pro-Putin piece of shit because you claimed that the reason Putin is shelling Ukrainian cities is to limit civilian casualties.
Oops, wrong thread.
Asshole Joe doesn’t know a lot.