Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
wvParticipantAwesome.
w
v
wvParticipantWell, i have a weird embarrassing unexplainable weakness for….’radar love’. So, I suppose I could watch it. š
w
v
wvParticipantIs he as good as Sammy Watkins?
w
v
wvParticipant
wvParticipant
wvParticipantAnd Putin… wants to continue to disrupt American civilization, and weaken our world standing, and heās going to keep doing that. A big shitstorm, constitutional crisis works just fine for him. Heās a winner either way. Trump keeps fucking shit up as he has been doing, or he cripples the governmentās ability to keep their eye on the ball at all because it is undergoing a governmental crisis.ā
———————–
Well then Putin and I want prettymuch the same thing š
I mean i like what RT reports on. I dont care what their ‘motives’ are, they tell more truth in 30 minutes than the American-MSM tells in a decade.
At any rate, the nation is so divided now, even if you took ‘russian interference’ or russian media’ out of the mix, there’d still be a growing shitstorm.
I think. I dunno.
As Noam always notes, all the surveys indicate the WORLD considers the USA the biggest threat to peace on the planet. Russia didnt cause that. Putin had nothing to do with that.
w
v
wvParticipant“accused”
===========
“So a dictator who has been accused of systematically killing his opponents asked us to extradite two of our citizens so he can ātalkā to them or possibly try them because they spoke out against him. And we didnāt immediately say no? WTH is going on? What do we stand for?” Jason ColeSo ‘accusations’ amount to proof now? And who is this “us” he’s referring to? Would that be the “us” that systematically kills opponents with drone-murders without due process on a weekly basis?
w
v
wvParticipantAt any rate, what about the NATO thing. You seem to think russia is an aggressor ā what about the NATO thing. Seems to me its the West thats the aggressor.
I remember reading about the missile defense systems awhile ago and I thought the same thing: Is this a good idea? Was it necessary? It does seem to be a poke at them. And it clearly pisses them off. Iām open to questioning that. But even IF that happened, I donāt expect Putin would suddenly shake our hand. Putinās #1 interest is the same as Trumpās: himself..
===================
Well, I like the way Paul Jay of real news network put it in a vid. He said American oligarchs are the enemies of Americans. And russian oligarchs are the enemies of Russians. Basically just a simple class argument. Thats how I look at it. I dont think of ārussiaā as āour enemyā.
Putinās a gangster. Trump/Clinton/Obama/Bush are bigger gangsters.w
vIf Russian oligarchs run complex operations to disrupt our election system, and pit American against American via social media ā which they did ā then theyāre our āenemiesā too.
These things can all be the case at the same time:
1. American oligarchs are our enemies
2. Russian oligarchs are the enemies of the Russian people
3. American oligarchs can be the enemies of people all over the world
4. Russian oligarchs can be the enemies of people all over the world.IMO, there is no reason to limit it to an impact on just their own countries, and I have a feeling that Paul Jay doesnāt do that for American power. Nor should he. So why the limit for Russia power?
=======================
Well, sure, Oligarchs are the enemy. I think Paul Jay was just reacting to the way the american MSM suppresses the ‘context’. The MSM just goes on and on about the russians and buries the…..well, youve heard all this from me a million times now. I dont wanna keep repeating the same mantra.
We just summarize each OTHER’s views — see if we have it right — and then um…i dunno….agree to shoot zn, er somethin.
w
v
wvParticipantAt any rate, what about the NATO thing. You seem to think russia is an aggressor ā what about the NATO thing. Seems to me its the West thats the aggressor.
I remember reading about the missile defense systems awhile ago and I thought the same thing: Is this a good idea? Was it necessary? It does seem to be a poke at them. And it clearly pisses them off. Iām open to questioning that. But even IF that happened, I donāt expect Putin would suddenly shake our hand. Putinās #1 interest is the same as Trumpās: himself..
===================
Well, I like the way Paul Jay of real news network put it in a vid. He said American oligarchs are the enemies of Americans. And russian oligarchs are the enemies of Russians. Basically just a simple class argument. Thats how I look at it. I dont think of ‘russia’ as ‘our enemy’.
Putin’s a gangster. Trump/Clinton/Obama/Bush are bigger gangsters.w
v
wvParticipantI just think that misunderstandings of entropy increase across time. Eventually, it will be completely misunderstood.
ā¦
===============
I’m not sure i understand the misunderstanding in question.
w
v
wvParticipantI just donāt think Putin wants peace. That isnāt his goal. He has other goals and frankly, that doesnāt include a great relationship with the United States. I think heās more inclined to watch us fail and sink from the world stage and whatever evils weāve unleashed on the world, he can easily do worse.
He is not our friend. He has no interest in that.
====================
I kinda think the opposite, but let a thousand flowers bloom š
At any rate, what about the NATO thing. You seem to think russia is an aggressor — what about the NATO thing. Seems to me its the West thats the aggressor.
w
v
wvParticipantBut Noamās interview was prior to the latest indictments from Mueller. Thereās more information now to deal with. I donāt think he would be as dismissive of Russian interference after reading them.
==============
Well the vid says it was published on July 4. When were the indictments? (the vid is in the other thread i started — did you watch it?)
And in the vid he doesnt dismiss the russia story. He says it probably happened — he just doesnt think its a major story. He does the ‘context’ thing. In the context of what the US does regularly, the russia thing is just not a major story.
w
v
wvParticipantTrump is moving the goalposts for what is acceptable by Russia. Putin will test that.
And then? Who knows? It wonāt be good.
===================
Well, I look at it like, yeah he’s moving the goalposts.. towards peace with russia.
And yeah, i think Dem warhawks and coldwarriors like Hillary will move the goalposts the other way when they get the chance. But i dont blame trump for that.
Listen to Noam on Russia. What do you think of his recounting of how the US/Nato has moved first-strike missiles country by country right up to Russia’s border. Despite the fact the US said it wouldnt do that.
w
v
wvParticipantbtw, Noam said somethin ive never heard him say before (not sure i agree with it). Near the end he talks about ‘debating’. He calls it irrational and gives his reasons.
w
v
wvParticipantFox News on Trump-Putin
wvParticipantPS….on that real news vid above, at about the eleven minute mark, Paul Jay alludes to the US interference in the CANADIAN elections in the sixties. JFK did it. I was not aware of that one. ….its hard to keep track of all of them š
w
v
wvParticipantWhether the Kremlin meddled in the U.S. election or not, the hyper-focus on Russiagate overlooks bigger threats: Russian elites to the Russian people, and U.S. elites to the American people, says Paul Jay
wvParticipantThem superbowl teams had some purty good OLines, I’m guessing.
w
v
wvParticipantMy own take is that Trumpās rationale for making nice with Russia is essential to consider. It makes the attempt beyond empty for me.
Itās also vital, IMO, to consider what heās done around the world. Itās not as if heās tried to reduce tensions anywhere else. In fact, heās raised them, threatening Iran with regime change, Venezuela with military invasion, even Mexico with the same.
He drove us to the brink of nuclear war with North Korea, prior to kinda sorta defusing the crises he created. And heās attacked our allies without mercy, throwing much of the world into chaos.
If he were an actual peacenik, Iād feel much differently about his overtures to Russia. But heās anything but that. Who hasnāt he attacked or threatened, other than Russia?
===============
I dont really care about his ‘rationale’ (I assume it is always just a reflection of his narcissism, etc). All that matters to me is Russia’s nukes. I want the threat of nuclear war to be reduced.
And i think he’s done that. I think he met with putin and he said “hey, whats with this election interference?” And putin goes, “Seriously? You people have been interfering all over the world for decades, LoL”. And trumpy goes, “I know, I know, now lets tell the press weve discussed it and the world is safe from nuclear war.”
So far, I’d say Trumps foreign policy is better than Bush’s.
w
v
wvParticipantI think the FBI has changed since Hoover.
One exampleā¦the FBI no longer thinks left wing radicals are the biggest threat to the country. They now believe homegrown white wing extremist groups are the biggest threat (ie Michigan Militia, 3 Percenters, the various neo Nazi and Klan groups, etc.).
Which is in direct opposition to the rightwing narrative that the biggest threats are illegal immigrants and Muslim extremists.
Now, Iām not saying the FBI is completely trustworthy because I donāt think they are, but it is telling that they are no longer marching in lockstep with the rightwing.
===============
Ok cool. We disagree on the FBI. I think they are as bad as ever, maybe worse.
I think they are the System-Police. They protect the system. So they will attack ‘radicals’. On the left or on the right doesnt matter. They are political police.If they just stuck to chasing down serial killers I’d have no problem with them. But thats just what they do part-time.
w
v
wvParticipantThing is, theyāve been under Republican control since before it was even called the FBI. Theyāre famously right-wing, even hard right ā which Trump is too.
So, to me, the entire attempt to claim a ādeep state conspiracy against Trumpā is absurd (Not saying youāre doing this, WV). If it (the deep state) exists at all, the vast majority of it is going to be more sympathetic to Trump and the GOP than their political opponents.
===============
Well but Trump isnt your garden-variety Republican is he. We know Trump has caused a lot of friction and waves with mainline-Reps, Like Bush for example. So I could see how a ‘deep state’ might have issues with a wacko who likes Putin.
But as I’ve said before, my view of the ‘deep state’ is not the rightwing view. Their view is just political paranoid bullshit.
w
v
wvParticipantA Spirited, Substantive Debate on the Trump-Putin Summit, Russia, and U.S. Politics
Trump n Putin:https://theintercept.com/2018/07/16/a-spirited-substantive-debate-on-the-trumpputin-summit-russia-and-us-politics/
wvParticipantPersonally, I want the US and Russia to have good relations. Ratcheting down the tensions is a good thing for the world, imho. I’m glad Trump is doing that.
As far as the russian interference, I’m just not concerned. At all.
I’ll worry about that kind of thing when the American-Corporate interference with democracy is addressed. Cause right now there is no democracy to interfere ‘with’.I’ll shut up now š
w
v
wvParticipantI’ve been reading a lot about the american FBI in my book on the Black Panthers. The FBI basically were murderers. Just flat out, murder. Hoover felt he was at war with radicals. He called them the biggest internal threat to the US in existence.
I dont see any reason to think they are better now, than they used to be. I mean why would they be?
I am at the point where i wouldnt trust a single solitary thing that comes from the F.B.I. I mean, I’m sure they tell the truth sometimes, but how would i know when?
Thats just me, of course. I know that view is not shared around here, and thats totally cool. Just sharing my own disgust with that subpart-of-the-System.
w
v
wvParticipantWhat lesson do you think is there?
I have a Serbian friend, btw, who was part of the opposition to Milosevic. He had a dog he named Tito.
ā¦
===================
I have no idea. I was just asking.
w
v
wvParticipant
wvParticipantAnother progressive:
wvParticipantcoalition building:
wvParticipantPerhaps the way to bridge that gap is to say: Democratic socialists are more than willing to push social democratic policies, on the way toward eventually achieving actual socialism ā Medicare for all, a living wage, cradle to grave free public education, etc. etc. But they still have the ultimate goal of fully democratizing the economy and socializing ownership of the means of production. Social democrats donāt have those goals. They are fine with Scandinavia as end-goal.
We socialists want more.
Btw, as Iāve said many times, Iād love America to have that Nordic model. Itās waaaay better than ours . . . and its results prove that. They live longer, healthier lives, and are happier. They do kick our butts on pretty much all the quality of life metrics. So if the choice is solely between our neoliberal model and the Nordic one, I definitely choose the latter, and eight days a week.
(We should also keep in mind that even the Nordic model has taken hits from right-wing centers of power in recent times, and is not in practice what Scandinavian social democrats would prefer.)
================
Allz-I-Know-Iz…I believe we leftists need ‘at least’ two languages, two sets of memes, two sets of tactics…..One for talking to the MSM and joe and jane centrist voter — and another language for places like this board.
Chomsky used to complain about the ‘concision’ problem. Its a problem for leftists who appear on tv and radio. Possibly, one way to deal with it is to use the Bernie approach — just stick to three or four practical policy points and hammer the hell out of them. “medicare for all” (the language is critical), “free college”, “livable minimum wage”.
He avoids all the complexities of ‘socialism’ etc and so forth. At least on tv he does. I’m sure in his inner circle he has a different language and more depth, etc.
Maybe this would work:
Tucker C: Are you a socialist?
Leftist on tv: I believe in medicare for all.
Tucker C: Are you a socialist?
Leftist: I believe in medicare for all. I believe the average person should get the same health care rich folks like you get. If you want to call that socialism, ok.
…and avoid Immigration talk at all cost š
w
vw
v-
This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by
wv.
wvParticipantThat incorruptible vid is good.
w
v -
This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts

