World, Writing, Wealth discussion

PK is an honourable gentleman, with, I would imagine, decent friends, so it's understandable he hasn't encountered those types of Europeans.

Unfortunately, Beau has had the misfortune to meet many of them.

The good news is that they are our equivalent of the likes of Nancy Pelosi, so their views can immediately be discarded.

Also of comfort to J and other Americans, they might sneer at Americans but they sneer at their own working class even more. So you're in good company.

Beau, you made statements in post 201 and deflected instead of giving a straight answer to questions, so I'll ask again:

You said the Bear needs to keep its claws sharp. Why do you care about the condition of the Bear's claws, this thing that cares nothing about the freedom of its own citizens or of those it consumes? I'd like to understand.

You accused the US of expecting something in return for its financial and military support of countries fighting for freedom as if that were a bad thing, and I replied that equal returns were justified. Your reply was that "Everyone is entitled to act in their own self interests, including Russia." Cheap shot. You changed the subject and didn't defend your original statement. That's disappointing.

Scout, no deflection or subject changing intended. I tried to be clear and concise.

To clarify, I neither support nor oppose Russia. I just want to try and understand why events happen and their potential consequences. To do this, I try and put myself in other people's shoes. If The Bear's claws blunt, it won't survive in its present form, so naturally it wants to keep them sharp. It's about self preservation.

Just like with the US - if you allowed your military to degrade, you would be open to domination by other countries, and you wouldn't want that, would you?

IMO, Russia under its present leadership is preferable to a weak Russia, which would be picked apart by predators and, at least for a while, descend into anarchy. Just like with Saddam and Gaddafi, sometimes better the devil you know.

On your 2nd point, the US supplies arms to Ukraine because the White House believes it benefits both parties. For reasons given across the threads, I disagree. This doesn't make me pro Russian or anti American because Trump, Gabbard, RFK Jr and many others hold the same view. I'm not sure why you think I've gone against my original points.

Beau wrote: "Scout, no deflection or subject changing intended. I tried to be clear and concise.

To clarify, I neither support nor oppose Russia. I just want to try and understand why events happen and their p..."

I have to contend a couple of points you make Beau as I think they cannot be disregarded: When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989 it left huge gaps in the bureaucracy it had suffered for decades so there had to be a large degree of chaos and there was. It spawned the billionaires (like Putin) who came out of the hypocritic shell of communism but the same would not happen again as there is now a fundamental and democratic system established, even though it is shat upon by Putin. The opposite is more likely: if Putin was toppled there are still enough of his kind, even worse according to some experts, to jostle for power. Perhaps, as I have hinted before, when that generation of belligerents is gone Russia will emerge with a government its lovely, creative and educated people deserve. Like Navalny. The only country that will feed from Russia, weak or strong, is China.
The US provides arms to Ukraine, as we and Europe do, for one reason only: that if they lose Russia, with China's backing. will be dangerously assertive.

I don't think Russia has a democratic system, but equally I don't think one is necessarily desirable. The ONLY real advantage of a democratic system is that it offers the opportunity to get rid of incompetents, although looking at what is on offer in the coming US elections one might question that. If you think democracy is so great, carefully examine what happened after the Battle at Marathon. Plato saw the failings quite well; the problem waq his only solution required on a great deal of luck,l and luck goes both ways.

I agree that toppling Putin is not a good idea - what will replace him is a problem, and replacement is the problem with most alternatives to democracy. That was why monarchies evolved - the disasters and blood-letting over replacements were gone, BUT the problem of a useless king was never solved.

If the only reason for providing arms to Ukraine is to ensure Russia does not win is because of China, then that is a false approach. The best way to keep both of these under control is to stop this war while Russia still cannot be sure of victory. As long as Russia cannot be sure of the outcome, it should be prepared to make some concessions. If Ukraine fails because it cannot continue this will be a worse outcome for the West, and nobody can be sure Western help will survive t a sufficient rate after the bout of coming elections.

Ian wrote: "I don't think Russia has a democratic system, but equally I don't think one is necessarily desirable. The ONLY real advantage of a democratic system is that it offers the opportunity to get rid of ..."

Russia has a democratic system but it is controlled by the State with the use of spasmodic laws to prevent results it does not want. Forms of democratic selection have been experimented since, as you mention, Greek and Roman times. But then, as now in many cases, it fails because the control of its use is in the hands of those in power and not in the constituted law. But it is, with democratic law-making, the only system that provides social cohesion over anarchy - although social media is now threatening that criteria. Because it is difficult to maintain democracy by inclusion it doesn't make it less essential. On the contrary: because it is now threatened in so many parts of the world it makes it even more important, even vital, that it is supported by all those who care that societies should enjoy the freedom of voice.
You have interpreted my last paragraph above incorrectly: it was not intended to say that China's aid for Russia is a reason for arming Ukraine. It meant that arming Ukraine was essential to prevent Russia from winning. There is no possibility in view that Russia would enter negotiations at this moment: both sides have to suffer a lot more before that will happen. But there are signs of Russia's increasing apprehension about the progress of the war: apart from the extensive efforts Putin is making to make friends and influence people, there was news today that Major General Ivan Popov, who was sacked by Putin last year for complaining of 'The mass deaths and injuries' of Russian troops has been arrested and accused of 'large scale fraud.' The ploy is not surprising but the outrage it has caused with the Russian war bloggers is. It is another sign that keeping the disaster of his war away from the people cannot succeed for ever.
England solved the problem of a 'useless ' King in 1648.

My reference to Marathon was to show up the worst aspect of democracy. What happened was the ignorance of strategy enabled some to manipulate the masses to vote in a way that led to the removal of their best commander now it was felt that the war was won. What happened was a few persuaded the masses (easier then when the vote was limited to how many could get into a stadium) to vote in a way that was not in the interests of Athens as a whole, but very much in the interests of a special few, and they didn't even have to bribe. They just spread misinformation that the masses accepted. My case is that much the same continues now, although the means are far more advanced.

I don't think Russia has any apprehension about the progress of the war, other than from the noises people like Macron are making. He won't want NATO forces there, and he has been remarkably quiet about the US having something like 60 specialists actively helping Ukraine with repairing equipment, etc and operating out of the US embassy in Kyiv. As for Popov, he is not the only one arrested for fraud, and it is noted that a number of posts on these threads have stated fraud/corruption is rife. I doubt we shall see the details, but there may well be a legitimate case.

I know Russia has a nominal democracy. My case is it is not a democracy if opposition is suppressed, but we differ only really in definition of terms on this one. However, I disagree that democracy is the only means of sociak cohesion. China coheres rather well, and I am far from convinced, after reading the latest interview with Trump in Time magazine, that Trump will lead to cohesion in the US

Interesting exchange between PK and Ian.

PK, good point about Russia's framework being different to when the SU collapsed. I hadn't considered that, but still think it's wishful thinking for democracy to emerge in a nation with no history of it.

Ian, I agree with the parallels you draw between Ancient Greece and today. Although I still believe that democracy is the least worst form of government, I believe that the Western liberal democracies have now passed their heyday, and government-backed misinformation is on the rise.

Don't know what the situation is in NZ but here, in the UK, I feel like we're being drip fed a narrative, by politicians and the MSM, to prepare us for outright war with Russia.

They - our own politicians, that is - can go to hell if they expect support for this stupid, tub-thumping nonsense. War between NATO and Russia will not be initiated by Russia, and it's most certainly not in our interests to start it, particularly in what stinks of a false pretext.

What may have prompted my version is that here, the government won the last election with a promise of tax cuts, and the statement the cuts were fully funded. Well, now we find they were not, and they have embarked on a slash and burn style economic policy. In fairness there was a very good case to reduce public sector spending, but they should have cut projects, not simply cut spending, leading to managers firing the staff who were doing things.

Your coming election will be very interesting, but so far from this distance I have no idea what will happen, except Sunak will lose a lot of seats.

Most pundits are calling a big Labour majority, and have been for a while. Labour seems to be expecting one too, and have already started sending people out to pay homage to President Zelensky (a prerequisite for any Western leader).

As an impartial observer, who despises both major parties equally, I spent a long time feeling that, due to the extent of the current Conservative majority, they might actually sneak back in with a single figure majority next time round.

However, by elections, over the course of this Parliament, have taken a good 20 seats off that majority, and the general demeanour of the Conservatives is now shocking. They look beaten and there's a lot of in fighting.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a hung parliament, with Labour as the biggest party, but can't discount a modest Labour majority either.

3 things to note:

1. The Conservatives are universally despised, even by their own hardcore support.

2. There is very little enthusiasm for Labour, particularly Starmer.

3. The above points to a very low turnout.

Btw, I'm far more interested in the US Election than ours.

Beau wrote: "Btw, I'm far more interested in the US Election than ours."

Beau's summary is probably accurate. I'm not sure we should be discussing either election on this thread: Scout will be tearing his hair out, but there is one cynical observation I heard from The Economists' political editor about the strange timing of Sunaks statement which doesn't give time for even their highly controversial and dubious Ruanda policy: that he timed it so that he could register his children to return to school in the States in September - he has a house there.

Nik should move this discussion of UK elections to a separate thread, because it has nothing to do with this one, but it is interesting.

In the event this is moved, a point that would interest me further is the question of what is the prediction for the Liberals? Have they got an act together? If everyone is annoyed with the two main parties, surely this is the time for them to strike?

Ian, I'll answer your question on the appropriate thread now...

P.K., not tearing my hair out. I don't care much these days about rules. I'd like to break some myself if I could get away with it, but being locked in a cage isn't something I can deal with. But I can dream.

Scout wrote: "P.K., not tearing my hair out. I don't care much these days about rules. I'd like to break some myself if I could get away with it, but being locked in a cage isn't something I can deal with. But I..."

You can also shout so we can all hear, Scout

I was watching the news today, looking at how we're using military resources in Israel and sending money and weapons to Ukraine. I'm in favor of this, but I had an epiphany. Before I get to it, I'm going to indulge in a little conspiracy theory about what Biden has done during his presidency. He put a stop to our energy independence, putting us in a weak position globally. He opened our border to terrorists, and we don't know where they are or what they're planning. In addition, illegal immigrants are costing taxpayers money, and the cartels are sending deadly drugs (with China's aid) into our country and killing our people. They're also trafficking humans. Biden allowed a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan so that we no longer have intelligence from that region. He got the Inflation Reduction Act passed and now admits it had nothing to do with inflation.
Now, Biden's telling Israel not to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities when they have an unprecedented opportunity to eliminate Iran as a nuclear threat.
Looking at all this objectively, I think you'd have to conclude that Biden has damaged this country. On purpose or out of stupidity.

And now for my epiphany. The U.S. is focused on the war between Ukraine and Russia. We're also focused on Israel's war with terrorists. I support both. But I also see that we're not focused on our own country. I see Iran and China and N. Korea in an alliance. China is building up its military to surpass ours. We don't have a functioning president. Our military is weak. Trump has a chance of becoming president, which won't be good for our enemies. Assuming our enemies have any sense at all, what better time to attack us? Maybe cyber, maybe terrorists, maybe financially. It's a perfect storm.

That the enemies look for openings to strike should always be a working assumption for all those in various security services. Biden's pacifying messages, even if well intended, might convey a message of weakness and unwillingness to fight. Hope nothing bad happens, but with certain groups and countries considering the US as a "Great Satan", better be safe than sorry

I disagree that Israel has the ability to eliminate Iran's nuclear facilities, at least in one strike unless Israel uses its nukes. If it does that, what happens next? I think it would be ugly, because the US and Europe are guilty of giving Israel nuclear capability, which would mean much of the rest of the world would now consider nukes as OK. Anything could happen

Wonder how would you know the ability?

I said I disagreed, not that I knew. The reports that I have seen indicate facilities tend to be deep underground, and the terrain of Iran has many places where a very large amount of rock could be above the facility and while entrances could be blocked, they can be unblocked. It seems fair to assume that Iran has considered the possibility of an Israeli attack and has taken reasonable precautions against it. But if you happen to know this is wrong, please enlighten me.

Does anyone agree that Biden has damaged our country in the ways I mentioned? He's supposed to have our country's best interests at heart, but nothing he's done makes me believe that. In fact, he's done more harm than good for this country. He's still president until January, which in reality means that we won't have a leader for almost 4 months. His own party declared him incompetent to be president, yet he's still in the White House. That is incredible, isn't it? Imagine if the sh*t hits the fan. We're sitting ducks because of him and his failures. Just imagine what the leaders of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea must be thinking.