MeDotOrg wrote: Do we care what happens in Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia?
Honestly? Meh. I mean, it'd be nice if they maintain their autonomy, but I wouldn't want the US to do anything beyond diplomacy unless a strong argument could be made that serves our interests in a real, tangible way.
Fortunately, I don't doubt that the State Department and the Department of Defense have people in them who are quite capable of explaining - perhaps even in terms comprehensible to Trump - what are the long-term potential consequences for the US (a nation whose prosperity depends crucially on a huge international network of trade and investment) of allowing its regions of influence, security and trust to be nibbled away little by little.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
That won’t change, because - as a Trump supporter - you’ve already told him that there’s no risk in his completely ignoring the problem aside from issuing occasional proclamations about wanting to build a wall. He knows that’s all that he has to do, because you’ll make no demands of him.
DJT has done everything he could do. That we didn't get a wall in 2016 falls squarely on the shoulders of Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Fortunately, I don't doubt that the State Department and the Department of Defense have people in them who are quite capable of explaining - perhaps even in terms comprehensible to Trump - what are the long-term potential consequences for the US (a nation whose prosperity depends crucially on a huge international network of trade and investment) of allowing its regions of influence, security and trust to be nibbled away little by little.
It sure didn't matter to Democrats when Putin took over Crimea. If DJT were to do anything to stop the nibbling, Democrats would paint Republicans as war hawks, hegemonists, blame them for the cost of the fight, blame them for the foreign people we kill. Then Republicans would blow an insurmountable amount of money in nation building rather than conquering and Americanizing the population. The truth is that we hate each other much more than Russia or any other foreign power and for good reason.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
MeDotOrg wrote: Do we care what happens in Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia?
Honestly? Meh. I mean, it'd be nice if they maintain their autonomy, but I wouldn't want the US to do anything beyond diplomacy unless a strong argument could be made that serves our interests in a real, tangible way. Blame my cynicism on Vietnam, the Iran-Contra Affair, CIA meddling in South America, Iraq II, and kind of sorta Afghanistan. And Africa. And the Philippines. And Cuba. Am I missing any other overt or covert ____ ups on our part? Best ease off a bit if history in the last 50 years has taught us anything.
- Doc
The Baltics are a sunk cost. They're part of NATO. If we look the other way while Russia undermines their sovereignty, we're abandoning NATO obligations, which will have very ugly rippling consequences. Yet if we fight back militarily, we risk global thermonuclear war. We're on the knife's edge there and I'm guessing less than 10% of the population can even name a Baltic state.
That won’t change, because - as a Trump supporter - you’ve already told him that there’s no risk in his completely ignoring the problem aside from issuing occasional proclamations about wanting to build a wall. He knows that’s all that he has to do, because you’ll make no demands of him.
DJT has done everything he could do. That we didn't get a wall in 2016 falls squarely on the shoulders of Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan.
He did all that he wanted to, which was to buy your loyalty with an empty promise. He didn’t want or need to do anything more and won’t do anything more. He’ll end up doing less for this issue and your particular interests within it than anyone else you could have voted for.
Democrats have repeatedly made it clear they are willing to use the wall as a bargaining chip because Democrats have little problem with spending billions of taxpayer dollars on a boondoggle if it gives them substantive policy wins elsewhere. That money is like coal in a boiler to them. The Schumer brigade either doesn't care or appreciate how that symbolism might affect future immigration policy or elections. Congressional Republicans were also willing to play ball, but the Trump admin blocked those deals because they are filled with immigration hardliners who don't want to give an inch on DACA and related matters. They're not getting the wall solely because they won't compromise.
Ajax is getting immigration policy wins. He got to see Hispanic children be gratuitously tortured by white supremacists in the government. What better win is there than that for him? It's just that he's not getting the win that is the block-headed symbol of the whole thing.
EAllusion wrote:I'm guessing less than 10% of the [US] population can even name a Baltic state.
Goodness me. Obviously the State Department and the Pentagon should modify their strategic threat analysis immediately on that basis.
In 1938, the then British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, broadcast to the nation:
"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing."
I mean, if the British people had such gaps in their geopolitical knowledge, it would have obviously have been far better to put an immediate halt to preparations for the possibility of the war which did in fact break out in 1939.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Given that the public chooses our leaders, the public probably should have a clue about how their leaders decisions affect the odds of a hair-trigger nuclear war breaking out.
EAllusion wrote:Given that the public chooses our leaders, the public probably should have a clue about how their leaders decisions affect the odds of a hair-trigger nuclear war breaking out.
That would indeed be a good thing. Hello public? Could you please do something about that? I mean, it would be, like ... easy?
So why don't you?
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.