Ukraine Crisis

[popeye1945]

popeye1945 wrote:

We are birds of a feather on your evaluation --- excellent!! With but one exception

I agree "but with one exception".

America is not the same America as when it was founded.
The world is in transition at present and a New World Order is being developed.
America is powerful, do not underestimate this.
Granted there is an imbecile at present as its President .......for now,
but in reality, he has no power, so who is behind the hierarchy and what are the motives that will affect us today?
Church and State is coming in the United States and it will eventually control the civil government.

Again, we agree, I believe however there must have been a genuine effort on the part of the power elite to dumb down the population so this would work. The American population to my way of thinking, are not smart enough to realize their political parties and elections are but theatre created for them, making them believe they really have a choice.


The First Amendment
The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The two parts, known as the "establishment clause" and the "free exercise clause" respectively, from the textual basis for the Supreme Court's interpretations of the "separation of church and state" doctrine. Three central concepts were derived from the 1st Amendment which became America's doctrine for church-state separation: no coercion in religious matters, no expectation to support a religion against one's will, and religious liberty encompasses all religions. In sum, citizens are free to embrace or reject a faith, and support for religion—financial or physical—must be voluntary, and all religions are equal in the eyes of the law with no special preference or favoritism.
Lauren Boebert went full theocracy, and proclaimed, “The church is supposed to direct the government” per the founding fathers.
Are her opinions on church and state separation simply her own, are they reflective of a large segment of the American population?

What does this morality movement in America mean?

In the past history has shown that when the church directs the state all it leads to is the crushing of individual rights, liberties, privacies, things like the constitution and bill of rights were actually made of.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-G-oAl9pF8

Who controls the world's money and power rules the world.

How is economic collapse preparation for global rule?

One thing for sure, we are in for a time of trouble and chaos.
[/quote]

Although I am not American, even I know that much about America's founding fathers and what their intentions were. I am afraid America is in for a time of Christian fascism, but this must be what the power elite want. Just part and parcel of the dumb factor. Hopefully with the global power structure shifting at least America will not be all powerful.

[Walker]

Question: When it becomes necessary, how will the US government market conscription in order to protect foreign borders, while simultaneously not protecting the US Southern border?
*
- Brandon made a surprise visit to Ukraine with oodles of cash in hand and a promise to support Ukraine for as long as it takes.
- “It” was not specified. Does he mean as long as it takes to start a world war?
- There’s talk here and there that Brandon promises the US will pay pensions and welfare to Ukraine’s citizens. Quite generous. Did he run this plan past the house of representatives, or is some emergency executive power in effect?
*
Russian propaganda about London.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world- ... n-29239245
*
Russian propaganda about the U.S.A.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK0yl0_PdDY&t=136s

[iambiguous]

"In Biden’s Unannounced Visit to Kyiv, a Preview of an Increasingly Direct Contest With Putin" new york times

This revolves in particular around my argument regarding "dasein and thermo-nuclear war".

It's not just two nations with different historical, political and economic assessments of Ukraine. It is, in turn, the psychological profile of these two individual men.

What will prompt them as individuals perceiving the world around them existentially given the embodiment of dasein as I understand it, to go "too far". To miscalculate how far the other will go and bring about the use of nuclear weapons?

Most focus on Putin, but, to me, "Sleepy Joe" is no less potentially dangerous here.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Question: When it becomes necessary, how will the US government market conscription in order to protect foreign borders, while simultaneously not protecting the US Southern border?

I have an answer, I think.

To the present power-wielding elite, to the American system generally, the influx of millions of illegal immigrants is not a problem. They will be absorbed. Many of them will work hard because they come from difficult circumstances. If there is social unrest, for a time, it will eventually abate.

But for the power-elite and for the planners and administrators of the global system Russia is a problem, a real problem. It invaded and is destroying a nation with a sovereign spirit. From their perspective Russia is a genuine problem and the situation that Russia got itself into (a disaster really, a terrible choice by Putin) must be made worse for him.

See the interview with Stephen Kotkin I posted on the Sleeping Giants thread.

Lack of attention to the border, and the drug problem, is a problem — but not quite the pressing problem as that of the global arena. The class of people most damaged by a semi-open border are also of marginal importance to power-elites and planners in comparison to the global order they are creating.

Can the MAGA right successfully exploit the indignation of the irrelevant class concerned for poor immigrants which affect their livelihood and that class’s aversion to decades more war which they inevitably fight? That remains to be seen.

[FlashDangerpants]

Oh shit, Walker's going to radicalise Jacobi.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Oh shit, Walker's going to radicalise Jacobi.

You are, naturally, stuck in a tendentiousness by which your entire outlook is determined. And stuck in that as you are, your seeing and certainly your understanding, are afflicted.

But I suggest there is a far more helpful way to examine the issues of the present. It requires remove, distance, and deliberately giving up holding — usually emotionally — to contrived, partisan positions.

You and others are locked into a weird ‘tango’ with those you so adamantly oppose (the ridiculous lefty clinging to his righty partner in unending bicker-sessions that get no one anywhere at all.)

And none of this is at all helpful to getting sufficiently above the fray to be able to see judiciously what is going on and to be capable of intelligent commentary.

Can I be ‘radicalized’? And by what sort of perspective or ideological position?

Curiously, radicalization in your case would be merely to achieve a reasoned and somewhat calm state of mind to then begin a study of current events. But I suggest you have no interest at all in that. Forum participation is an extension of a psychological derangement. That is the field of your activity and off-gassing your primary focus.

Making sense?

[FlashDangerpants]

Did you recruit Henry Q?

[Belinda]

Question: When it becomes necessary, how will the US government market conscription in order to protect foreign borders, while simultaneously not protecting the US Southern border?

I have an answer, I think.

To the present power-wielding elite, to the American system generally, the influx of millions of illegal immigrants is not a problem. They will be absorbed. Many of them will work hard because they come from difficult circumstances. If there is social unrest, for a time, it will eventually abate.

But for the power-elite and for the planners and administrators of the global system Russia is a problem, a real problem. It invaded and is destroying a nation with a sovereign spirit. From their perspective Russia is a genuine problem and the situation that Russia got itself into (a disaster really, a terrible choice by Putin) must be made worse for him.

See the interview with Stephen Kotkin I posted on the Sleeping Giants thread.

Lack of attention to the border, and the drug problem, is a problem — but not quite the pressing problem as that of the global arena. The class of people most damaged by a semi-open border are also of marginal importance to power-elites and planners in comparison to the global order they are creating.

Can the MAGA right successfully exploit the indignation of the irrelevant class concerned for poor immigrants which affect their livelihood and that class’s aversion to decades more war which they inevitably fight? That remains to be seen.

I was thoroughly in tune with Stephen Kotkin, and especially loved his thesis on why history is important. His discussion of war of attrition and his pragmatic therapy to extract the sting from the Ukrainian/Russian war of attrition was masterly. I loved his comparing and contrasting France , and Russia.
I was a little upset by his glorification of "the West" including as he did Israel as part of "the West", and unsophisticated as I am, I wondered if his exposition of contemporary warfare and political strategies was all for rationalising his glorification of "the West". I hope not!

[Alexis Jacobi]

I was thoroughly in tune with Stephen Kotkin, and especially loved his thesis on why history is important. His discussion of war of attrition and his pragmatic therapy to extract the sting from the Ukrainian/Russian war of attrition was masterly. I loved his comparing and contrasting France , and Russia.

I had the same reaction. These are people who have an *historical* perspective on empires and power and in that regard it is not surprising that he is pro-America and pro-Occident.

I was led to wonder what his opinions are on domestic and social politics in the US.

I was a little upset by his glorification of "the West" including as he did Israel as part of "the West", and unsophisticated as I am, I wondered if his exposition of contemporary warfare and political strategies was all for rationalising his glorification of "the West". I hope not!

There is really no one that I am aware of that could ever say out loud that they have reservations about Israel. Plus Kotkin is Jewish and I assume a Zionist supporter.

The right or the wrong of Israel and its policies, for people like this, are less relevant than the strategic game of global politics. Their object is to solidify Israel's position and force bellicose neighbors to accept Israel's existence and regional power.

[popeye1945]

Of necessity I believe Israel is an utter whore to America. There are only two countries in the world not for lifting the embargo against Cuba, and those are Israel and the United States; injustice has strange bed fellows sometimes.

[Belinda]

Alexis Jacobi wrote:

There is really no one that I am aware of that could ever say out loud that they have reservations about Israel. Plus Kotkin is Jewish and I assume a Zionist supporter.

I am surprised! I have just done so and so has Popeye. Moreover disdaining Israel's theft of Palestinian lands is common among my friends in real life and nobody is too reserved to speak it out loud in company. Are there thought police where you reside?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Alexis Jacobi wrote:

There is really no one that I am aware of that could ever say out loud that they have reservations about Israel. Plus Kotkin is Jewish and I assume a Zionist supporter.

I am surprised! I have just done so and so has Popeye. Moreover disdaining Israel's theft of Palestinian lands is common among my friends in real life and nobody is too reserved to speak it out loud in company. Are there thought police where you reside?

What I meant is not among the fringe opinions of people with little social and academic and political standing, but among those with academic and political positions — for example at prestigious institutions. The Hoover Institute is just that sort of place.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Of necessity I believe Israel is an utter whore to America. There are only two countries in the world not for lifting the embargo against Cuba, and those are Israel and the United States; injustice has strange bed fellows sometimes.

Cuba is free to trade with anyone in the world. There is a US embargo of course. Canada does lots of tourism business for example. The reason few do business in Cuba is because there does not exist a free, open economy. The Cuban government does not allow that. So Cuba hobbles along.

You confuse no diplomatic relations with Cuba with a restriction against business relations. Israelis can and do do business with the Cuban government. But the government controls all business dealings. There are ‘joint projects’ between foreign players and the Cuban government. But the government is always mediating all transactions.

Cuba is a closed, restricted economy and little business is done with it because the government won’t allow it. Were things different Cuba would be thoroughly different and of course (far more) prosperous.

[popeye1945]

Of necessity I believe Israel is an utter whore to America. There are only two countries in the world not for lifting the embargo against Cuba, and those are Israel and the United States; injustice has strange bed fellows sometimes.

Cuba is free to trade with anyone in the world. There is a US embargo of course. Canada does lots of tourism business for example. The reason few do business in Cuba is because there does not exist a free, open economy. The Cuban government does not allow that. So Cuba hobbles along.

You confuse no diplomatic relations with Cuba with a restriction against business relations. Israelis can and do do business with the Cuban government. But the government controls all business dealings. There are ‘joint projects’ between foreign players and the Cuban government. But the government is always mediating all transactions.

Cuba is a closed, restricted economy and little business is done with it because the government won’t allow it. Were things different Cuba would be thoroughly different and of course (far more) prosperous.

OK, I'll have to look into it more deeply but find it difficult to believe the United States is not leaning on other countries to fall in line with its unjust embargo. Actually, both Kenndy and Obama wanted to end the embargo, just one of the reasons Kenndy's countrymen exterminated him. I suspect we both have it somewhat wrong; your slant does not sound like a reasonable conclusion.

[Alexis Jacobi]

OK, I'll have to look into it more deeply but find it difficult to believe the United States is not leaning on other countries to fall in line with its unjust embargo. Actually, both Kenndy and Obama wanted to end the embargo, just one of the reasons Kenndy's countrymen exterminated him. I suspect we both have it somewhat wrong; your slant does not sound like a reasonable conclusion.

That would certainly be the case except there are limits. Canada -- and numerous other countries -- do hospitality business in Cuba.

To use the term *unjust* gives away your orientation and position. If you were to be really interested in *justice* you'd have also to make statements about the dictatorship managed by the Castro regime. You'd have to know and have some knowledge of the social harm done to millions of people over the course of so many years.

You are also speculating -- wildly -- about the Kennedy assassination.

What is it that we have wrong? I view power and the use of power I think very differently from you. First, I accept it as a reality. You do not seem to. Many of your opinions and declarations seem 'knee jerk'.

What seems to you to be a more 'reasonable' conclusion to have come to?