You’d use your own head and assess for yourself what that tape means.

it’s a coincidence the guy they decided on just happened to be the guy who ended up being Prime Minister for two terms, right?

like i said in my original comment. it’s an interesting phenomenon. if you were to look in the past, it’s very easy to convince people the US acted covertly in many ways that were clearly imperialist. for example in Guatemala or Cuba or Iraq. It’s hard to find someone trying to defend US actions in these cases. But as it’s happening that goes out the window because propaganda has a powerful hold on emotion

Let’s take a step back and let me ask you a question. Please answer instead of diverting or otherwise trying to deflect

Question is: Do you believe money holds influence in US elections and do you think people with money actively try and influence elections?

Russia is a terrible ally and an even worse overlord I’m not arguing against that. It has a brutal history and a brutal people whose cultural DNA goes all the way back to the Mongol hordes pillaging and raping for tribute

Right, what I was getting at was that all the other claims are bullshit, this is a war because winning it would grant Russia strategic advantages, and they thought they’d win the conflict, probably not even expecting a full war; just a three day special operation.

yes, they expected Ukraine to fold. So did US intelligence, at least ostensibly.

although at this point, anybody paying attention sees the writing on the wall. Russia has been slowly inching forward all year. They will win unless there is some sort of dramatic change in battlefield dynamics

and US has no intention of allowing Ukraine to win. this is why I see US involvement as cynical. It was never meant to actually help Ukraine. Ukraine has been under Russian orbit for centuries. Throughout the entirety of the Cold War, it was under Russian control.

It does not meaningfully alter the power balance between US and Russia. US is just taking advantage to extract as much as they can out of this war and then when the juice is squeezed out of the lemon, Ukraine will fall under Russian control.

So if Ukraine losing was the point the entire time - what “help” was our help? It wasn’t to help the people, prolonging a destructive war only kills more people, destroys more homes, hamstrings economic output for a longer period of time. it will cost over $500B to reconstruct Ukraine (and I guarantee there won’t be any lively debates in congress on approving that aid) and Ukrainian demographics are ruined for a century

This is sort of my entire point - the US interests in this war don’t line up with the Ukrainian citizen. We want

a) Russia to bleed as much as possible for every inch

b) as much public $$$ as possible to be transferred to private hands

c) battlefield intelligence, both on new technologies and capabilities and on new Russian doctrines (for example drones & EW have been game changers) in preparation for the real war on the horizon

those goals mean the best way to play it is to hurt Ukraine as much as possible. Keep the war going on as long as possible. But never invest enough for Ukraine to win - that would likewise end the war.

It’s a very cynical and misanthropic position

Nobody is forcing Ukraine to ask the US for help (except Russia).

But who is “Ukraine”?

Who gets to make the decisions? The people of Ukraine? The unconstitutionally appointed government? The one who happens to cooperate directly with the CIA? The government that stems from the series of far-right protests that led to a coup? In a country where US has been pumping money for decades?

It sounds like the logic of Guatemala.

United Fruit Company (whose CEO was brothers with director of CIA) owned large swathes of land to grow bananas. They also owned railroads, telephone lines, and other general infrastructure.

A new democratic movement sparked up in order to take some of that land and distribute it to the people of Guatemala - why should a foreign company own all the farmland? (Similar thing happened in Cuba, except they were successful)

So what happens in Guatemala? A CIA supported coup puts in a new right-wing government. Now that new government cooperated with the USA and made sure United Fruit Company (Chiquita these days) kept the spice flowing.

Now, if you were to tell me “But kava, the Guatemalan government asked the US for help. It’s their independent and sovereign decision”

But was it really? Who gets to call the shots?

That’s the fundamental question here. I am not discounting sovereignty of Ukrainian people because Euromaidan is NOT the Guatemalan coup. It’s a whole different event with a different set of factors and influences. I wouldn’t even go so far to say it was a CIA-led coup. Just a CIA-supported one.

But the question is a nuanced one and not so simple as “Ukraine asked for help”. It’s more like Ukraine had no choice but to ask for help. The power-dynamic is not an equal one - like a teacher having sex with a student. Is it possible for that relationship to be consensual?

Like Chomsky says “we will fight them to the last Ukrainian”

Or was it North Korean?

Ukraine is in the process of being destroyed. It’s the only country involved in this war that is suffering that fate.

You should be supporting Ukraine because of democracy, sovereignty, and the security guarantees you gave them by signing the Budapest memorandum, remember, when Ukraine gave up its nukes.

Stop spreading misinformation. Read the Budapest Memorandum again, please. There were no security guarantees given by the US.

I believe in democracy and sovereignty - the US state does not.

and that’s another reason why you won’t be dropping Ukraine

What happens to Ukraine does not ultimately matter to US power. Right now it’s a convenient place to test new weapons, get battlefield intel, inject some nice cash into defense contractors.

But the real focus is on the East.

All this, ultimately, just amounts to a French win

See, I view the total opposite. It’s interesting how people can see the same thing and get different conclusions

After WW2, Europe was essentially made subservient to the US. The threat of the Soviets was very real and the US was the only one that could keep the Soviets at bay. Therefore, NATO was formed. Cue the infamous quote from the first General Secretary - the reason for NATO was “to keep the Americans in, the Germans down, and the Russians out”

After 1991 there was a real hope that Russia could integrate with Europe. No more USSR, no more threat, right? No more reason for NATO, no more reason for hostility. Imagine a Europe where Russia was integrated into the security blanket. Europe would become a superpower by its own right - no need to bow down to the Americans. There was decades of slow attempts at integration (for example with energy like natural gas pipelines)

But that vision never materialized and after a gradual decline in relations, Russia invading Ukraine was the best gift Russia has ever given to the Americans.

It basically started the process of a permanent decoupling of Russia from Europe and it forced the Europeans into the arms of the Americans. Now, Europe has no choice but to align with the Americans.

This is the reason you start seeing populists like Trump start using harsh rhetoric about NATO. “Freeloading Europeans now need to pay their fair share”, etc.

The reason why Americans can get away with it now, where they couldn’t before, is because Europe has no choice.

agree. the regular people are always the ones that will end up suffering. lockheed martin shareholders got to enjoy a 30% spike in their holdings after feb 2022. hundreds of thousands of ukrainians lost family members, had to flee their homes, lost limbs, many died/will die, etc

i view geopolitics almost like i do tectonic plates. every once in a while when there are shifts, earthquakes happen. I think the Ukraine war is the small earthquake that always happens right before the big one.

to make more WW2 analogies

spanish civil war & italian invasion of ethiopia ₌ ukraine proxy war & israel/gaza/lebanon/iran situation

rise of fascists across europe ₌ rise of the new pseudo-fascists in US & Europe & really all over the world (look at Argentina, India, etc)

Lot of text to say “yes it was unconstitutional”

It’s impossible to sugar coat what Euromaidan was. Just like Azov, it slowly gets whitewashed because of propaganda. But at its core, it was a series of protests sparked by the Ukrainian far-right that led to an escalating ladder of violence that resulted in a coup. The day after the new government was appointed, it immediately bent the knee to the CIA. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/25/world/europe/cia-ukraine-intelligence-russia-war.html

https://jacobin.com/2022/02/maidan-protests-neo-nazis-russia-nato-crimea

If that – those totally irrelevant right sector fucks – is the US’s influence in Ukraine then it truly is pitiful. Compare the influence of glorious Europe: Ukraine actually wants to join up!

This war, for all intents and purposes, is a proxy war between US and Russia. US decides Ukrainian policy. US is the largest funder of this war. US gets to appoint Ukrainian politicians https://www.reuters.com/article/world/leaked-audio-reveals-embarrassing-us-exchange-on-ukraine-eu-idUSBREA1601K/

US has a long history of meddling in Ukraine https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/11/covert-operation-ukrainian-independence-haunts-cia-00029968

No, you’re just parroting their BS propaganda.

just because I refuse to drink one side’s kool aid does not mean I drink the other side’s. i’m an individual with imperfect knowledge doing my best to reach the closest thing to truth i can with the information i have available. you can attack me all you want, but i don’t really see how you addressed anything in your comment except : “the unconstitutional coup was justified because of popular support and so it doesn’t matter that it was illegal & you denounce the idea that the US has influence in Ukraine”

How was Ukraine “destabilized” compared to other comparable ex-USSR states until 2014?

see below. Ukraine was in a special position. most similar to Belarus, although much more important. US pumped money in a lot of ex-soviet states, that’s true.

If a country being in US orbit is a reason for Russia to attack it, why didn’t they attack Finland? Or the US directly in Alaska? What’s the significance with Ukraine?

Ukraine was under the Russian orbit since the 1700s. It was a fifth of the economic output of the USSR. In the Russian nation-state mythology Kiev is the mother city of all Russians. They share one of the largest borders in the world of mostly plains.

There’s a lot of reasons. Russia views Ukraine as theirs. Neither Finland or Alaska hold a fraction of the ideological, historic, and strategic importance to the Russians

The same memorandum btw granted Ukraine non-military aid from the US and France

go and re-read the 1994 agreement. it does not promise any help at all beyond promising to “seek immediate [UN] Security Council action”.

i don’t really think it’s relevant to the discussion though. international law (aka treaties) are used as justifications when convenient and ignored when not convenient.

Ukraine is getting destroyed because they happen to be a small country in between two great powers having a proxy war. Russia is the invader, the aggressor, the one who broke international law.

But US is not naive here. This was expected and planned for a long time before 2022 and a long time before 2014. Proxy war takes two sides to tango. We’re not supporting Ukraine because of democracy and sovereignty and human rights, we’re doing it for geopolitical motives. A sort of modern Spanish Civil War. Testing out new battlefield technology before the next Great War.

Unfortunately for the people of Ukraine the geopolitical motives and interests of the US don’t necessarily align with their interests. Like Chomsky says “we will fight them to the last Ukrainian”

we’ve been pumping money into regime change in Ukraine since the early 90s. NED (National Endowment for Democracy) used to show the dollar figures and specific organizations on their website but deleted that information a while back. You can still find it with Wayback Machine

Essentially we’ve been funding and supporting organizations in Ukraine under the guise of “pro-Democracy™” “pro-Liberty™” with the goal of supporting any potential chances for regime change. Some of those organizations just happen to be associated with the far-right groups that were part of the initial government that was unconstitutionally appointed In 2014 after Euromaidan- a series of violent protests that forced the pro-Russian president to flee the country.

tldr: we’ve been destabilizing Ukraine for a long time. the idea was to peel off Ukraine from Russia’s orbit and throw it into the US orbit. And it worked. Which is why Russia invaded in 2014

Note before I get the inevitable Russian shill comments - I’m not justifying any aggressive invasion by Russia. I’m saying this is a proxy war - a game of tug of war between two larger powers. Neither care in the slightest about what actually happens to the Ukrainians.

They will not recover from this war for a hundred years. But Lockheed Martin stock will perform nicely

edit: and remember this comment in 15 years. people will be talking as if what I’m saying is obvious. but right now the propaganda is strong- just like in 2003 with invasion of Iraq

At the time when we launched the aggressive and illegal invasion of a sovereign county, we were doing it for Democracy™ and Human Rights™

At the time, you would have been called a traitor, shill, or insane to suggest otherwise.

After some years, it becomes absolutely clear none of it was true. It was all for imperialist motives. It seems that the propaganda is strong, but it has a short half life. Today you’ll have trouble finding someone defending the US invasion of Iraq.

I think we are seeing the same thing with Ukraine war. In 10, 15 years people will see the war for what it is- a progressive destabilization of Eastern Europe and intentional proxy war.

But right now- it’s Sovereignty™, International Law™, and Democracy™

We destroyed Iraq. We doomed millions of people for generations. And we are participating right now in the destruction of another country.

It’s just that we do. We destroy.

i’d like to think life exists on every single rocky planet. i remember reading about the discovery of single celled organisms deep in the earth’s crust. they exist in a very low-energy environment and therefore have slow metabolisms. some of these are theorized to be able to live for over a million years. they literally extract energy from inorganic compounds in metabolic pathways we don’t understand.

the question is: did life originate on the surface (deep sea hydrothermal vents are still surface in this context) or deep in the earth?

if life originated in the earth, then I think there’s a very high probability every single rocky planet is essentially a seed. inside of it’s core it has life and whenever the surface environment grants some long term stability, the life slowly emerges and evolves into different forms.

so how would extra terrestrial beings and humans interact in the next 10 years?

basically, I think there’s a chance (although low on such a short time scale as 10 years) that we will discover life on another planet. or at least some very significant signs of life. either on Mars or Venus or some Galilean moon, etc.

Life just isn’t good at cooperation.

Our only data point for life is carbon based life on Earth. And from that we have

• a variety of insects that live in colonies that cooperate in a profound way, putting themselves in harm’s way for the sake of the colony. Ie ants, bees, termites

• a variety of insects (and fish and birds) that have swarming behaviors, which involves individuals coordinating movements to confuse predators, conserve energy, or find food. ie locusts, sardines, starlings

• a variety of animals that work as herd animals, which intuitively agree to use the power of numbers to increase the safety of the herd. Ie gazelles, sheep, cattle

• a variety of predatory animals that cooperate in order to bring down animals they would have a much harder time getting alone. Ie wolves, lions, and arguably humans

• a variety of primates that live in tribes ie chimps, baboons, and again humans

• a variety of trees that share resources through vast underground fungal networks, known as mycorrhizal networks. so not only are trees cooperating with other trees, the fungus is enabling that cooperation in exchange for a piece of the pie

and that’s just complex life, there’s many more examples in cellular life. animals have been known to show altruism, social animals take care of each other, like feeding and caring for the wounded.

cooperation has evolved in virtually every branch of the tree of life and oftentimes independently. it wouldn’t happen if life wasn’t conducive to cooperation and cooperation wasn’t a positive selective pressure of evolution

and i mean, just look at modern human society. do you really think our globalized society would work without a profound amount of cooperation? we even have a word for this idea, the social contract.

I really don’t get this viewpoint of yours. I see the opposite. Yes, humans run into problems at large scales but life absolutely is good at cooperation and in fact the most successful species tend to be the most cooperative

primary thing $$$

it’s what will ultimately make or break the strike. people start getting desperate when they are behind on their rent

i feel like only people with too much free time get bored

most people are caught up in their own day to day lives. it’s just the nature of things.

you have to go to work to pay your bills. your girlfriend wants to go out to dinner every once in a while. you have to go have dinner at your parents. you have to walk your dog. you have to brush your teeth, do your laundry. you have to figure out what you’re gonna eat for dinner. should probably schedule that dentist appointment soon. need to do my taxes.

etc

really doesn’t leave you that much time or energy to worry about the big problems of the world.

look at the chaos that Y2K was. one doesn’t simply adopt a new calendar.

it’s too ingrained. it’s like ripping out the foundations of a house to build a new one. it would have to be one hell of a calendar

Israel & the US are more or less one and the same. if i remember correctly, 98% of representatives in congress last election cycle was endorsed by the AIPAC

there’s a reason we can only vote for pro-Israeli politicians. Israel projects US power in the mideast

not saying they don’t do all of that. read the reuters article i linked before. or this one: https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/03/why-russia-has-been-so-resilient-to-western-export-controls?lang=en

russia does not need israel. they have complex and sophisticated systems that these days use China a lot but they don’t even need China. it’s sometimes impossible to tell whether you’re selling your microwaves to a russian company or not. it’ll look like a legit company, and then it gets somehow routed to russia and they use the microchips or whatever.

all i’m saying is

a) it doesn’t need Israel’s help for this.

b) israel doesn’t have the industrial capacity (small country, gdp only $500B) the geopolitical position for it (they are a tool of US interests and would not meaningfully harm US interests) and the domestic will for it (again, russia is friends with Iran, Israel’s mortal enemy)

there absolutely are parts of the government that will support Russia. Almost half of Israelis speak Russian and have connections to that area. So yeah, of course. But from a top-down directive it’s doubtful

notice i’m not denying Israel does not supply extremists. i’m specifically referring to this russia-israel dynamic

yes, israel supports extremists. they have a very advanced intelligence system and do all sorts of crazy shit. they’re wild. i agree

if you look at my history it isn’t particularly pro-israeli

it’s just that in this specific context, I don’t think it’s as significant as it may seem on first reading. Israel has had a long relationship of cooperation with Russia. Although lately things have gotten more tense between the two, with Iran and Russia becoming closer. Iran is Israel’s mortal enemy and Russia supplying money and tech transfer over in exchange for Shaheeds is a big no-no for them

so while yes, there probably are pro-Russian elements in the Israeli state that have probably helped Russia circumvent sanctions and export controls… the brunt of their materials probably comes from China, from European sources, and maybe even American companies themselves.

russia doesn’t need Israeli help to get access to American parts

All the way back in the Cold War the Soviets had a governmental department specifically to source parts from the West that was blocked off to sanctions. They have decades of experience creating shell companies, intermediaries, etc.

if someone wants to do more research the parent organization was “First Main Directorate of the Committee for State Security under the USSR council of ministers” and the department was called “Directorate T: Scientific and Technical Intelligence” sometimes referred to as just “Line X”

so basically the Russians have had many decades of experience circumventing sanctions and export controls. The Russians, while a shell of the former USSR, still have a lot of the human capital and base of experience in this regard.

I remember reading an article on Reuters or Washington Post or something where apparently even after sanctions, the Russians are getting roughly 90% of the high-tech components they were getting before the war. So the sanctions have hurt, but by a marginal amount. I think it’s this article: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/western-industrial-components-rebuilding-russias-military-2024-08-16/ but Reuters is now paywalled for me