• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

At a secret airfield in Eastern Europe, a multinational effort to send weapons to Ukraine proceeds at high speed

"Can't agree"?

or,

"Can't dis-agree"?
Can't agree. I find Geraldo pretty bad - though I'll admit he's not the worst, and sometimes has more positive, like his advocacy for Covid safety.
 
I don't want you to think that I'm bagging on you because you seem like a nice person, but you should consider a screen name and profile picture change. :)

Trust me, early-on here, I went as far as paying the donation fee for a name change! But having several hundred posts to my name by then, I just decided to let it ride and never got around to it.

--

Did you ever see the stories of how the Rolling Stones got their name? They got a phone call for their first paid gig, and when the guy booking them asked their name, they had none; During the call, Mick had a Muddy Waters album laying at his feet called "Rolling Stone", and that's what he went with to end the call and get the gig!

Well, that was me too! As I was completing my registration here, I had no screen-name in mind, but had a copy of "Manufacturing Consent" on the nightstand that I was currently reading, and BAM! I became "Chomsky"! A simple spur-of-the-moment decision!

But, I will say this: I really enjoy reading Chomsky, even when I don't agree with him, which is often enough. He has ways of opening my mind. He makes me think outside the box. And, I like that! Also, he is a treasure; the last of the living old-school WW-II era Jewish Liberal Intellectuals. I sort of put Bernie in that category, too, even though he's not an exact fit. But when we lose these two, we are losing the last of a broken mold.

--

Anyway, thanks for the kind comment. I've come to live with this nick, and I really don't mind it. Chomsky is one of my favorite authors, and a guy I greatly respect,
 
Last edited:
Can't agree. I find Geraldo pretty bad - though I'll admit he's not the worst, and sometimes has more positive, like his advocacy for Covid safety.

Understood.

He's no hard-core journalist, but as a person he comes-off as halfway-decent, which is what I was referring to.

I'm always interested at the moderates or Liberals that can manage to function at Fox News. Some would call them sell-outs, which I understand. But, I find the skillset they have to survive there to be interesting. In fact, I'm always interested in individuals that can function in environments that are opposed to their normal leans or ideologies, especially if their lean or ideology is diametrically opposed to their environment!
 
He's no hard-core journalist, but as a person he comes-off as halfway-decent, which is what I was referring to.

I am not criticizing him for not being a good journalist, but for personal qualities. For example, Roger Ailes and sexual harassment - Geraldo defended him. Matt Lauer and sexual harassment - Geraldo defended him, where even Fox distanced themselves from him. He's a 'friend of trump'. Sorry, I don't know any 'friend of trump' I don't have a bad opinion of.

I'm always interested at the moderates or Liberals that can manage to function at Fox News. Some would call them sell-outs, which I understand. But, I find the skillset they have to survive there to be interesting. In fact, I'm always interested in individuals that can function in environments that are opposed to their normal leans or ideologies, especially if their lean or ideology is diametrically opposed to their environment!

That's an interesting position in general. It doesn't make everyone in that situation a good person.
 
I am not criticizing him for not being a good journalist, but for personal qualities. For example, Roger Ailes and sexual harassment - Geraldo defended him. Matt Lauer and sexual harassment - Geraldo defended him, where even Fox distanced themselves from him. He's a 'friend of trump'. Sorry, I don't know any 'friend of trump' I don't have a bad opinion of.

Actually, I wasn't aware of either of the bolded.

That's an interesting position in general. It doesn't make everyone in that situation a good person.

Fair enough.
 
Actually, I wasn't aware of either of the bolded.

To be fair, he later said he regretted having defended Ailes. How sincere that was versus how self-serving, I don't know.
 
Trust me, early-on here, I went as far as paying the donation fee for a name change! But having several hundred posts to my name by then, I just decided to let it ride and never got around to it.

--

Did you ever see the stories of how the Rolling Stones got their name? They got a phone call for their first paid gig, and when the guy booking them asked their name, they had none; During the call, Mick had a Muddy Waters album laying at his feet called "Rolling Stone", and that's what he went with to end the call and get the gig!

Well, that was me too! As I was completing my registration here, I had no screen-name in mind, but had a copy of "Manufacturing Consent" on the nightstand that I was currently reading, and BAM! I became "Chomsky"! A simple spur-of-the-moment decision!

But, I will say this: I really enjoy reading Chomsky, even when I don't agree with him, which is often enough. He has ways of opening my mind. He makes me think outside the box. And, I like that! Also, he is a treasure; the last of the living old-school WW-II era Jewish Liberal Intellectuals. I sort of put Bernie in that category, too, even though he's not an exact fit. But when we lose these two, we are losing the last of a broken mold.

--

Anyway, thanks for the kind comment. I've come to live with this nick, and I really don't mind it. Chomsky is one of my favorite authors, and a guy I greatly respect,
I just happened on your conversation, guys. I wanted to let you know I enjoyed it. I grew up in a house that had "The Nation" and "The New York Review of Books" on the living room table all the time along with "The New York York Times" so it warms my heart when people talk about people from the good old days. I was recently reading something on-line about linguistics and Chomsky was quoted. I had no idea what his linguistics theories were.
 
Just wondering of your opinion?

Usually, we think of the military or populace precipitating an over-throw; but, do you think the Oligarchs can facilitate an over-throw? Do they have the power & reach?

The military is being run by two generals of the Army.

That is not the very best guarantee for Putin - but since he is a smartass I am sure he is not depending upon those two either.

He has a horde of Russian army soldiers that are protecting him personally ...
 
Unfortunately, Putin has a very good system of propaganda and information control in place.

How much of the truth, will the average Russian hear?

True on both counts.

Time will tell all ....
 
"The Washington Post" has an opinion piece today that says Putin had better watch his back. It says that danger can come at him from three places: the oligarchs, the military, and the Russian people. It does not seem to think that the oligarchs are much of an imminent threat, but says that Russian history shows Russia is unforgiving to those who lose wars. I infer from that that Putin may one day lose his position, but that no one had better hold his breath waiting for it to happen.
 
I read some statistics. Putin has committed about half his tanks to Ukraine. Looks to be the older tanks too. I am sure that ratio is true for the rest of it as well.
Its almost like Putin thought he could get away with using his half ass out of date Army to bring down the second largest country in Europe. Like doing it on the cheap.
 
The military is being run by two generals of the Army.

That is not the very best guarantee for Putin - but since he is a smartass I am sure he is not depending upon those two either.

He has a horde of Russian army soldiers that are protecting him personally ...

Yes, the bolded is my understanding.
 
I just happened on your conversation, guys. I wanted to let you know I enjoyed it.

Thank you!

I grew up in a house that had "The Nation" and "The New York Review of Books" on the living room table all the time along with "The New York York Times" so it warms my heart when people talk about people from the good old days.

My childhood household was quite different, but I was fortunate that I was deep inside a world-class city, where I had contact with a lot of culture & ideas, and access to quality academics. And not just access to 'academic education' - if I chose to attend, but public access to university activities. There was always something interesting going-on! And often, free! What young person could resist?

I've often professed my need to be part of, or at least have access to, a world-class metro area. And, I can't re-iterate how strongly I feel about this for raising children. Having the city at my feet as a child, was having the best playground there is! Kids need to be exposed to the knowledge and culture of the world, to be inspired, and to have the opportunity to participate and fit in where their interests & desires take them. We don't want to cut them off at the knees, by limiting the resources that will allow them to rise to their full potential, allowing them to rise to the greatness they are capable of - whatever that may be.

As to the NYT, there was a period early in my life where all I seemed to do was work full-time during the days, and go to school at nights and on Saturdays. On my way home Saturday evening after my day classes, I would grab copies of the local paper, the Sunday Times, and Barrons; along with some bagels, lox, & cream cheese! Those, along with the Sunday morning political and investment TV shows, was my Sunday morning ritual! After a six day grind, it was all I had the energy for. But, it was one of life's simple - and sweet - enjoyments!


I was recently reading something on-line about linguistics and Chomsky was quoted. I had no idea what his linguistics theories were.

The RL Chomsky is first & foremost a Linguist! And a seminal one, at that. He taught at M.I.T., for krissakes. He did research at Harvard; He is published by University of Chicago. I don't use the term "WW-II era Jewish Liberal Intellectual" lightly, as he is all of those, with no lack of emphasis on "intellectual"! He is very intellectual!

I'll also admit, I much prefer reading him, than hearing or watching him. His dead-pan monotone voice & delivery drags on for me. But his written words? Wow! His written words literally jump off the page for me! They open my mind, challenge my reality, challenge my underlying premises; and that's a good thing!

--

Thanks for reading! Hope I didn't TL;DR you!
 
Thanks for reading! Hope I didn't TL;DR you!
Hardly, you write in a charming and open way that invites the reader into your world. You left me wanting to know more about how you grew up since you volunteered only that it was in a metropolitan area (which you embraced passionately, which says something about your character).

My husband is a city person at heart and I believe for some of the same reasons you embrace cities. He always made the most of them, as you did. Except for The New York City Public Library, which still had card catalogues and a reading room when I was in college in New York City and which I loved, I did not enjoy being in a city very much. Or maybe I just don't remember. But I was glad to spend my summers studying at the University of California at Berkeley which was the farthest thing from New York City I could find!
 
No idea what the bolded has to do with my premise?

My reference to 'proxy war' is largely directed at Ukraine. I suspect Putin sees it this way, too.

Your post indicated that you believe that Western donations of war supplies to Ukraine can be considered war by proxy.
However, a proxy war is when you get someone to fight a war on your behalf, not when you give someone stuff. and that is what the West is doing.

Example: The US was not in a proxy war with Germany by virtue of Lend-Lease prior to the German declaration of war, but it was in a proxy war with North Vietnam leading up to the deployment of land troops in 1965 by virtue of military coordination and support.

Now, I'm sure NATO is not unhappy about draining Russian military strength a bit, but that's still not a proxy war. Maybe we need some intermediate term for whatever is going on in Ukraine, or what was going on in the 80's when the Afghani Mujahedin received Stinger missiles from Reagan (quite similar situations). A "near-proxy war" perhaps?
Nah, too incendiary. Let's just call it "humanitarian arms deals".
 
DEMOCRACY IN RUSSIA?

Maybe we need some intermediate term for whatever is going on in Ukraine, or what was going on in the 80's when the Afghani Mujahedin received Stinger missiles from Reagan (quite similar situations).

What we need is exactly what is happening. Russia is being locked-down financially.

The guy who has been running Russia for the past "how long"? See here:
Maybe we need some intermediate term for whatever is going on in Ukraine, or what was going on in the 80's when the Afghani Mujahedin received Stinger missiles from Reagan (quite similar situations).

What we need is exactly what is happening. Russia is being locked-down financially.

The guy who has been running Russia for the past "how long"? Here's the list:

List of presidents
NameTerm of officeLength of term
Boris Yeltsin1991–19998 years, 174 days
Vladimir Putin (1st and 2nd terms)2000–20088 years, 0 days
Dmitry Medvedev2008–20124 years, 0 days
Vladimir Putin (3rd and 4th terms)

And "Putinity" was Yeltsin's key-man throughout the 1990s!

But how do you get rid of guy who is surrounded by his own personal-guard? See here: Putin’s security men: the elite group who ‘fuel his anxieties"

And has stacked the Russian "HofR" (the Duma) with his own people! How did he do that? See WashPo here:
Fake candidates and jailed opposition: Russia’s parliamentary elections stack the deck for Putin

NameTerm of officeLength of term
Boris Yeltsin1991–19998 years, 174 days
Vladimir Putin (1st and 2nd terms)2000–20088 years, 0 days
Dmitry Medvedev2008–20124 years, 0 days
Vladimir Putin (3rd and 4th terms)

But how do you get rid of guy who is surrounded by his own personal-guard? See here: Putin’s security men: the elite group who "fuel his anxieties"

Democracy in Russia is a pathetic financial rip-off by a select group of individuals who are multi-millionaires ...
 
Last edited:
Ouppps! Got that wrong! Billionaires, not Millionaires!

See here: List of Russian billionaires - Wikipedia

I suspect that the major countries have decided to "do something" about the massive rip-off that Putin produced whilst working for the head-of-state in Russia at the time (Yeltsin - 1991-1999).

There are a bit less than 120 billionaires in Russia today. All of them "did it by themselves fairly in one of the weakest national economies"?

Unbelievable - but time will tell all ...


PS: List of Russian billionaires here.
 
Last edited:
Your post indicated that you believe that Western donations of war supplies to Ukraine can be considered war by proxy.
However, a proxy war is when you get someone to fight a war on your behalf, not when you give someone stuff. and that is what the West is doing.

I suppose this might depend on what degree of involvement defines a 'proxy war'?

It seems pretty clear to me that what started as a humanitarian crisis, has escalated to a rallying cry against Putin. We are not supplying boots on the ground, but are supplying significant armaments, funding, mercenaries, public relations, communication equipment, and even near-real-time tactical field data!

Example: The US was not in a proxy war with Germany by virtue of Lend-Lease prior to the German declaration of war, but it was in a proxy war with North Vietnam leading up to the deployment of land troops in 1965 by virtue of military coordination and support.

Now, I'm sure NATO is not unhappy about draining Russian military strength a bit, but that's still not a proxy war. Maybe we need some intermediate term for whatever is going on in Ukraine, or what was going on in the 80's when the Afghani Mujahedin received Stinger missiles from Reagan (quite similar situations). A "near-proxy war" perhaps?

Perhaps.

Nah, too incendiary. Let's just call it "humanitarian arms deals".

Ah, with that bit of tongue-in-cheek humour, I take it that you can at least see some overtones in my claim? I believe you may, just as I respect you are trying to supply a technical & legalistic definition of what is occurring.
 
How much of the truth, will the average Russian hear?

How much of the truth will the average American hear and accept?

From here:
All American presidents have lied – the question is why and when

Excerpt:

Those who dislike a president tend to emphasize the frequency or skill with which he lies.

During the Trump administration, for instance, The Washington Post kept a running database of the president’s lies and deceptions – with the final tally running to over 30,000 falsehoods. President Joe Biden’s critics have insisted that he, too, is a liar – and that the media is complicit in ignoring his supposed frequent deception of the American people.

The frequency of these criticisms would seem to indicate that most people do not want a president who lies. And yet a recent study of presidential deception found that all American presidents – from Washington to Trump – have told lies, and knowingly so, in their public statements. The most effective of presidents have sometimes been effective precisely because they were skilled at manipulation and deception.

Wakey, wakey America .... !
 











--

For several days now, I've been turning more pessimistic of Putin succeeding in his attempt to take Ukraine, or even Kyiv, much less his ability to hold either. And along the way, I've seen Biden derided for 'not leading, not doing enough'. I've seen doomsaying. I've seen some claim President Zylenksy is martyring himself.

However, I will once again say, 'We should not count Ukraine out', and not assume things are not happening behind the scenes. Because apparently, much is happening behind the scenes!

This CNN article is chock-full of info, and I think it's worth a more thorough read (it's not long). I tried to capture the most newsworthy bits in my excerpts.

But, I must draw your attention to my last, bottom-most excerpt; the excerpt explaining the lack of progress in the 'Russian 40 Mile Supply Convoy'. Yep. Uh-huh. Now, we know!

As I earlier said, and actually have said for days, I suspect there's a lot going-on behind the scenes, that we're not aware:

"Ladies & Gentlemen, I believe we now have a proxy war!"

Yep. I really am coming to believe it - a proxy war!

So now, there is one type of doomsayer, who I suppose I will now have to entertain more seriously:

"Those who believe we are heading into WW-3!"

I can't say I'm panicked or overly concerned about a World War, but I must admit I do believe we are in a proxy war, and that is an edge closer to the possibility.

Also, given my OP article, I think we now know why Putin is acting so savagely, and has virtually committed his entire military into this endeavor. He knows it's a proxy war, 'Him against the world'!
I give it 24 hours before the Autists on 4chan dox the airfield.
 
Ah, with that bit of tongue-in-cheek humour, I take it that you can at least see some overtones in my claim? I believe you may, just as I respect you are trying to supply a technical & legalistic definition of what is occurring.

Absolutely. Your assessment was far from unfair.
However, if we don't have that legalistic definition, it becomes very easy for bad actors to expand on the types of interaction with their victims that they can label unwarranted provocation with some degree of credibility.
That carries with it many-faceted risks, that are probably best avoided.
 
It seems pretty clear to me that what started as a humanitarian crisis, has escalated to a rallying cry against Putin. We are not supplying boots on the ground, but are supplying significant armaments, funding, mercenaries, public relations, communication equipment, and even near-real-time tactical field data!

Putin is the easy target. But, it is the Russian people who are far more important.

If this needless war is to make any sense, it will be to overturn Putin who is largely responsible since he was working for the first Russian president, Yeltsin in 1991 who then passed the mantle onto Putin in 2000.

Yeltsin had to be the one who started milking the ex-Soviet Union bank account.

From here: Russian oligarch

Excerpt:

Russian oligarchs are business oligarchs of the former Soviet republics who rapidly accumulated wealth during the era of Russian privatization in the aftermath of the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. The failing Soviet state left the ownership of state assets contested, which allowed for informal deals with former USSR officials (mostly in Russia and Ukraine) as a means to acquire state property. Historian Edward L. Keenan has drawn a comparison between the current Russian phenomenon of oligarchs and the system of powerful boyars which emerged in late-Medieval Muscovy.[1]

The first modern Russian oligarchs emerged as business-sector entrepreneurs under Mikhail Gorbachev (General Secretary 1985–1991) during his period of market liberalization.[2] These younger generation entrepreneurs were able to build their initial wealth because Gorbachev's reforms effected a period "when co-existence of regulated and quasi-market prices created huge opportunities for arbitrage

The loosening of the Russian market for goods and services - once belonging to the "Soviet Union" started as early as 1985. That's more than 30 years ago.

These people have had plenty of time to milk the economy by employing comparatively cheap-labor. And they have been known for quite some time. What has changed everything is the fact that the Russian people may have "woken up" to the privileges of liberty? Like electing one's own political leaders? (See here about Putin's election in 2007.)

Russia has to change and if it doesn't the economy is going to dive deeply. THAT will bring the Russians onto the streets demanding new leadership that THEY ELECT. It's already starting. McDonalds is closing its outlets! Can you imagine anything so DEADLY to an economy as McDonalds closing its business!


Navalny comes readily to mind as the best alternative ...
 
Last edited:
Without doubt, we don’t have a progressive tax system. The percentage of tax has a cap. Without a doubt, that system has been regressing, as exemplified by the Trump/Rep tax plan we suffer now. Without a doubt, our progressive tax system favors the rich and large corps.

And when will "Wakey, wakey " arrive in America.

The ability for the rich to get only richer is amply visible in America, one of the most unfair countries on earth:

View attachment 67379450

Will it never end? Over the past 60 years since JFK started the trek downwards in upper-income taxation, the rich have only become richer.

Which is a sad consequence of the drastic lowering of upper-income taxation in Uncle Sam's land ...
 
Back
Top Bottom