Sen Tuberville Stands tall for Putin and Blames the US

[Tigerace117]

Good post.

Unquestionably, the Western Hemisphere is the number one strategic interest of the United States, and there's no way we would tolerate Russia or anyone else trying to militarize Mexico. I just don't think that it would ever get to the point of invasion. The US fleet would cut off any and every attempt to militarize the US Mexico border, and the economic pressure we coudl bring to bear would be overwhelming.

Part of me almost wishes that the scenario you describe would play out because I think we should deploy military assets against the cartels. In my view, they are terrorist organizations, killing our citizens in pursuit of wealth if not political ideology. Instead of trying in vain to block fentanyl coming through ports of entry in containers, which is how 90+% enters the country, we should be drone striking those muther****ers. Make it a capital offense to smuggle drugs, and violate the hell out of Mexican sovereignty - and due process - to absolutely destroy cartel production facilities and their leaders with drone strikes, at home with their families if necessary. Make it simply too painful and dangerous to smuggle drugs and you will wipe out most of the trade. Going after users and low level dealers is a waste of time.

A blockade of Mexico is an act of war.

The US carrying out strikes against the cartels would be an idiotic idea. There’s no way Mexico would tolerate the US “violating the hell out of its sovereignty” in the name of going after the cartels.

 

[Utility Man]

 

[brianpatrick]

Hey bud, guess what?

We know what happened when Cuba overthrew its American backed dictatorship.

Whining because you don’t like having to face the facts can’t change them.

Yes we put an embargo on them and crushed them economically. Then we claimed “look socialism doesn’t work!” Meanwhile the socialists be like: “how do we know?”

 

[LostInSeattle]

A blockade of Mexico is an act of war.

And what would you call an invasion?

The US carrying out strikes against the cartels would be an idiotic idea. There’s no way Mexico would tolerate the US “violating the hell out of its sovereignty” in the name of going after the cartels.

I didn't say that we could do it. I'm saying it would be effective.

 

[yankintx]

This is why jocks should not be put in leadership positions outside the sports field.

 

[Tangmo]

Good post.

Unquestionably, the Western Hemisphere is the number one strategic interest of the United States, and there's no way we would tolerate Russia or anyone else trying to militarize Mexico. I just don't think that it would ever get to the point of invasion. The US fleet would cut off any and every attempt to militarize the US Mexico border, and the economic pressure we coudl bring to bear would be overwhelming.

That would be the USN 3rd Fleet that has the Pacific east of the IDL.

The laws of blockade have been changed since the USN 2nd (Atlantic) Fleet blockaded Cuba during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. That anyway was focused on the shipboard missiles underway to Cuba from Soviet Russia that were forced to turn back halfway. The Fleet's orders did not include an economic blockade which is a long term Naval tactic.

Today the laws of blockade require economic and humanitarian provisions to be immune. The blockade must be strictly against military assets only. So any US Naval blockade against an errant Mexico would have to exempt economics related shipments, thereby limiting such pressure. Besides, the US and Mexico are so intertwined by their Free Trade agreement that the US economy would feel the impact right away. This factor would anyway be true of any US invasion of Mexico, given especially the hugely productive economic manufacturing zone just south of the common border.

Mexico is not going to risk any of this anyway, especially for something so plainly stupid as accepting the military assets to include expert personnel from foreign enemies of the United States and the Americas.

 

[post]

He's correct.

The truth hurts.

Fluffing our adversaries by amplifying their talking points is not the definition of peace through strength. It is capitulation.

https://www.google.com/search?clien...FHTN7DIIQ0pQJegQISBAB&biw=768&bih=336&dpr=2.5

Spies and Their Masters: Intelligence–Policy Relations in ...​

senator. Memo from Roosevelt to the Attorney General, 11 May 1942, cited in O'Reilly (1983), p. 25. Roosevelt was asking the FBI to investigate Senator Robert Reynolds who, according to a periodical, had worked closely with a pro-Hitler ...

https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,885176,00.html

U.S. At War: End of Buncombe Bob?​

Monday, Nov. 15, 1943
Follow @TIME


The accomplishments of North Carolina's Senator Robert ("Buncombe Bob")Rice Reynolds are varied. He has been married five times, sired fourchildren, kissed the late Jean Harlow on the Capitol steps, and is theonly U.S. Senator to shoot an enraged bull walrus at 20 feet. For ten years he has been a labor-baiting, immigrant-hating demagogue, an implacable isolationist with Fascist trimmings and Fascist friends.U.S. Fascist opinion of him (as expressed by Fascist Lawrence Dennis):"No brains." This week Senator Reynolds announced he would not run forre-election next year. No tears fell.

Today in Asheville history, Sept. 20

Today in Asheville history, Sept. 20

www.citizen-times.com

Sept. 20, 2015
Robert Rice Reynolds represented North Carolina in the United States Senate from 1932-45, and he had a controversial political and personal life. In 1941, the 57-year-old senator married Evalyn McLean, a 19-year-old heiress. The age difference between the two, the economic advantages the senator accrued from the union, and the fact that this was Sen. Reynolds’ fifth marriage did not go unnoticed in the press.

Senator Bob Reynolds & Evie McLean | The Knoxville Focus

 

[post]

Yes we put an embargo on them and crushed them economically. Then we claimed “look socialism doesn’t work!” Meanwhile the socialists be like: “how do we know?”

Check the timeline.

https://20thcenturywars.com › august-6-1960-cuban-revolution-fidel-castro-nationalizes-u-s-and-foreign-owned-properties

August 6, 1960 - Cuban Revolution: Fidel Castro nationalizes U.S. and ...​

Aug 6, 1960 - Cuban Revolution: Fidel Castro nationalizes U.S. and foreign-owned properties In July 1960, Cuba seized the American oil companies and nationalized them the next month. In October 1960, the United States imposed an economic embargo on Cuba and banned all

 

[Spock]

I don't think you fully understand Tuberville's point...not that I really care what you think.


No, just as I don't approve of NATO provoking Russia.

"Provocation" is one of those magic words that you reactionaries love to use to justify imposing your will on others.
It is interesting that you want to validate Russian claims. "Provocation" is determined by the complaining party and PURELY subjective.
Multiple nations could be claimed as a "provocation" to Russia.
Putin want to re-establish a Russian empire and, in spite of Ukraine having a different language and culture, considers it part of Russia.
It is no more a threat than Finland, except in the minds of those who want to promote imperialism.

 

[nota bene]

Explain how the USA-USSR relationship and nuclear weapons in Cuba relates to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

I was responding to a quote in the OP: " It’d be like Russia coming to Mexico and putting missiles in Mexico.” Keep up.

 

[Spock]

I was responding to a quote in the OP: " It’d be like Russia coming to Mexico and putting missiles in Mexico.” Keep up.

How, exactly, is the situation "like" the Cold War era crisis? Try to expand your reading comprehension.

 

[nota bene]

How, exactly, is the situation "like" the Cold War era crisis? Try to expand your reading comprehension.

Spare me the juvenile insults please.

 

[Spock]

Spare me the juvenile insults please.

You are unable to defend your position. Got it!

 

[nota bene]

You are unable to defend your position. Got it!

I don't need to defend a position. I stated a fact: "Well, we didn't take too well to missiles in Cuba." You don't got nothin'.

 

[Spock]

I don't need to defend a position. I stated a fact: "Well, we didn't take too well to missiles in Cuba." You don't got nothin'.

You deny that you were communicating an opinion?
When you post on a discussion board, the natural assumption for any reader is that you had a specific reason to communicate and an opinion.
If you have no opinion or capacity for thoughtful input, I will assume in the future that you have nothing to contribute to any discussion.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

I don't need to defend a position. I stated a fact: "Well, we didn't take too well to missiles in Cuba." You don't got nothin'.

This is true, we didn't want them there. We still don't.

Russia needs to get out of Crimea and the rest of the Ukraine. If they had not unlawfully invaded, there would be no issues.

 

[Spock]

This is true, we didn't want them there. We still don't.

Russia needs to get out of Crimea and the rest of the Ukraine. If they had not unlawfully invaded, there would be no issues.

Do you see substantial differences between the Cuba crisis and Ukraine invasion?

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Do you see substantial differences between the Cuba crisis and Ukraine invasion?

What I see in Ukraine is an attempt by Russia to steal land and resources. Russia is trying to rebuild the Soviet Union. That is not acceptable.

In Cuba, we simply had a lunatic dictator who was pissed at the United States inviting a key enemy to place nuclear weapons in their territory. It's not quite the same situation.

 

[Tigerace117]

And what would you call an invasion?

I didn't say that we could do it. I'm saying it would be effective.

No it wouldn’t. The Mexican military has been fighting the cartels for twenty plus years.

 

[Tigerace117]

What I see in Ukraine is an attempt by Russia to steal land and resources. Russia is trying to rebuild the Soviet Union. That is not acceptable.

In Cuba, we simply had a lunatic dictator who was pissed at the United States inviting a key enemy to place nuclear weapons in their territory. It's not quite the same situation.

In Cuba, you had the US furious a dictatorship which had run Cuba as little more than a colony for the United States was overthrown.

 

[Spock]

I don't think you fully understand Tuberville's point...not that I really care what you think.


No, just as I don't approve of NATO provoking Russia.

Listen and learn:

Tucker Went to Russia and Got a History Lesson | On the Media | WNYC Studios

The connections between Russian history, propaganda, and empire.

www.wnycstudios.org

 

[Rogue Valley]

I don't need to defend a position. I stated a fact: "Well, we didn't take too well to missiles in Cuba." You don't got nothin'.

Do you have any credible source regarding the US placing nuclear-capable missiles in Ukraine?

If not, then your "Cuban missile" complaint is apples and oranges.

Historically, the US aided Ukraine in destroying her substantial nuclear arsenal 30 years ago.

 

[ripvanstinkle]

Tommy is the dumbest senator by far, but this idiot isn’t some Soviet sympathizer….he’s a useful dolt that goes along to get along. Although that’s dangerous.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Tommy is the dumbest senator by far, but this idiot isn’t some Soviet sympathizer….he’s a useful dolt that goes along to get along. Although that’s dangerous.

One can't be ambivalent regarding Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

If Tuberville is anti-Ukraine, then he is also pro-Putin via default.

 

[Tangmo]

Tuberville is a PutinTrumpRower.