What about Joe?

[Marty_d]

If you're after a good thriller on free tv, try "Red Election" on SBS on demand.

[facthunter]

Yeah! Cheap thrills are OK. Don't listen to NR too much you might get slightly informed and become persona non grata to your normal friends..  Once something is politicised truth and reason depart the scene.  Just roll your eyes and  say WOT!.to every thing they  say. They'll either leave or thump you in the head. Either way a lifelong friendship may be no more..  Nev 

[willedoo]

Joe is trying to pickpocket 3.5 billion dollars from the Afghan people. The Afghan Central Bank owns 7 billion dollars held in the U.S. and frozen by the U.S. administration. Biden has signed an executive order to split it in half, keeping 3.5 for humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, and giving the rest to American victims of 9/11. What a piece of shite act that is.

 

[willedoo]

On the positive side for Joe, I think he's still handling the Ukraine issue reasonably well. He has been involved with a bit of the hysteria and dog whistling of his administration, but among it all he's still handling the Ukrainian administration sensibly. Most importantly, he's still telling them that although the U.S. will supply materiel aid and economic sanctions in the event of Russian aggression, no U.S. troops will be deployed on Ukraine soil. NATO is giving them the same message. Basically, they are telling the Ukraine government that if you start this thing by launching a military attack on the Donbass, you're on your own. There's been problems in the past with Ukraine misinterpreting the signals from Washington, and Biden has done a good, decisive job of making things clear.

[Yenn]

There  have been problems with many people misinterpreting signals from Washington. The Kurds stand out well and the poms also.

We have never seen or heard any evidence to show that Russia is going to invade the Ukraine, all we have is the say so of the USA and we have seen how good that is many times in the past.

The Yanks only have one aim in life and that is to keep themselves at the head of the table.

What we have now is the Yanks still saying invasion is imminent, but even the Ukraine does not believe it.

If it does happen I will be very surprised, because I never believe what the US government says.

If it doesn't happen the Yanks and Scumbag are going to say how clever they were to stop Putin.

We have seen all this kind of thing in the past and are we going to fall for it again?

Russia would not benefit from an invasion, it would not make Putin appear good in the eyes of the Russians, but he will look good when he can show that he has twisted the tail of the Western allies and all he has to do is declare that the war games are concluded and take the troops home.

[willedoo]

The Ukrainian president has been asking the Americans and Brits to tone it down a bit. He says that Ukraine intelligence is seeing no immediate threat and that invasion claims are starting to hurt the Ukrainian economy.

 

Putin has some valid gripes. He's only really upped the ante since the Americans deployed strategic missile bases in Romania and Poland, both of which are capable of hitting Moscow. Add to that, Trump tore up the INF treaty which banned nuclear and conventional missiles within the range of 500 to 5,500 kilometres. The banning of mid range missiles was the only thing keeping the region relatively safe. If the Americans and NATO were ever to push into Ukraine and Belarus, establishing missile bases in those countries, it would be an existential threat to the Russian Federation. In that case, Russia would lose strategic balance which would lead to an arms race escalation and further de-stabilise the region.

 

One of Putin's main beefs is that the Americans won't attempt to negotiate with Russia as equals. The U.S. treats them like everyone else and comes to the negotiating table with a closed mind of demands, ultimatims and threats. All Putin wants is security guarantees, the respect of decent negotiation and an end to the U.S. flippantly dismissing any of Russia's valid concerns. The Russians are sick of being treated like fools.

.

[facthunter]

Ruskies lost more lives in the Last war than the rest combined. The US just wants to rub their noses in the Cat$#!t. They can't help themselves.  Nev

[onetrack]

These people are COMMO'S!, don't forget! The very anthithesis of the American Way, with GOD on their side! They need to be humbled at every opportunity, just to show how much better the American Way is! 

It's strange how Russian Communism didn't matter, when there was a common enemy in the form of the Nazis - America gave more material assistance to Russia, than any other nation, during WW2. 

 

The figures on the page below are not complete, the Americans also gave the Russians a sizeable number of locomotives and rolling stock to help with their logistics.

 

https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/

 

[Old Koreelah]

Perhaps not exactly a gift. The Russians paid gold for aid. One shipment of that gold ened up at the bottom of the sea, courtesy of a U-Boat and was eventually recovered.

[onetrack]

Old K - Yes, perhaps I should have clarified "giving". The Lend Lease (War) equipment was never actually paid for, but Russia did provide a substantial amount of "Reverse Lend Lease" payment in the form of multiple tens of thousands of tons of vital manganese and chrome ore, which America needed in larger quantities than it could mine itself. Russia also provided some oil and fuel supplies to America.

In the "Pre-Lend-Lease" period (June 1941 to Sept 1941), Russia paid for its war supplies from America in cash and gold and vital minerals.

 

In 1945, America valued their civilian aid to Russia at US$2.6B, out of a total of US$10.8B in War aid, which included LL. 

America initially issued a formal debt claim to Russia at the end of WW2, for US$1.3B. The Russians protested, and the figure was reduced to US$722M.

Russia only made 3 payments totalling $48M in 1973 before repayment was suspended. But Vladimir paid off the remaining debt in full by 2006.

 

It's interesting to note that D-Day was put back 12 mths on the advice of U.S. economists, who claimed it would take 200 divisions to launch an assault on Europe in 1943, which would adversely affect the American economys ability to supply the goods, materials, food and equipment needed for the U.S. Forces.

This caused Stalin and many Russians to become angry, as they claimed that America was stalling on the invasion, so the Russians could bear the brunt of destroying the Nazis.

 

There may be some truth to this, as Reverse Lend Lease provided a vast amount of assistance to America in her war production and fighting efforts.

The accommodation, food, clothing and even aircraft provided by the Allies, in the Allied countries, was of exceptional value to the Americans.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

 

https://www.quora.com/Has-Russia-paid-off-the-USSRs-Lend-Lease-debt#:~:text=M answer views-,Yes.,10 years ago in 2006.

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by onetrack

[old man emu]

The Yanks like to make the rest of the Allied world think that Lend-Lease was a big-hearted gesture by the Yanks - sort of "no strings attached". But there were more strings attached than the Weifang International Kite Festival.

 

By the end of the 20th Century, I think that all the Lend-Lease debt had been repaid by those countries that owed it. Britain made its final Lend lease payment on Dec. 28, 2006. 

 

The U.S. extended $4.34 billion in credit in 1945, allowing Britain to stave off bankruptcy after devoting almost all its resources to the war for half a decade. Since 1950 Britain has made payments on the debt, the final payment of which is worth $84 million, at the end of every year. At the time it was granted, the loan strained trans-Atlantic relations. British politicians expected a gift in recognition of the country's contribution to the war effort, especially for the lives lost before the United States entered the fight in 1942.

 

"The U.S. didn't seem to realize that Britain was bankrupt," said Alan Sked, a historian at the London School of Economics. The loan was "denounced in the House of Lords, but in the end the country had no choice."

 

The need to borrow followed a decision in 1945 by the administration of President Harry Truman to end the lend-lease program used to supply Britain since 1941. By that time, Britain owed £4.2 billion to foreign creditors, while its income from overseas investments and exports had been halved since before the war.

 

John Maynard Keynes, the economist and lawmaker who was then the top adviser to the British Treasury, likened his country's financial situation to the military rout at Dunkirk. Prime Minister Clement Attlee dispatched Keynes to Washington to seek support. Instead of a subsidy, Keynes came back with the loan, fixed at 2 percent interest to be reimbursed in annual payments that were structured like a mortgage. The payments were mostly interest in the early years and shifted toward capital later on.

[Yenn]

The USA has never done anything for anyone that didn't have an upside for USA. They have lied and acted treacherously since god knows when. They have started wars on a bed of lies and they have failed to end their warlike intent even 20 years after the end of hostilities.

Putin is not wanting to end up where North Korea is now. Treated as a pariah, when there is plenty that should have been done to rectify the faults. He is wanting to even the balance and is not sorry if he makes the USA look foolish, because that is what is going to happen. Anyway tomorrow is the day. Haven't religions been down that path many times?

[old man emu]

Despite protestations to the contrary, the mind set of the United States is to be an empire builder. Its major weapon of conquest is economic dominance, backed up by a willingness to use military intervention. It has been said of many  dominant, ancient civilisations that first the traders come, then the military to protect the traders. Look at any European empire-builder since the first Mesopotamian clan traded grain for meat. 

 

The United States is one of the three active empire builders of our times. The Russians seem to have drop their ardour for empire building of the first half of the 20th Century. Maybe that ardour has been tempered by the realisation that it has reached a point where it can settle back with what it has within its own borders, and do quite nicely developing its assets. Just for fun, it likes to poke a stick at the American Eagle from time to time. The Chinese don't need to take over more land. They have land enough to expand their manufacturing centres in order to generate wealth by selling to the rest of the world. Occasionally, the Dragon roars, but the Chinese are astute enough to keep it restrained so it doesn't run amok breathing fire to destroy others.

 

The United States, however, runs on the philosophy that more is better. And to get more, it needs to conquer other nations with money, and if that fails, by subversion. At the same time its greedy mindset causes division amongst its own people. The French lower classes destroyed a thousand year monarchy because the monarchy was the enemy of the people, clutching the Nation's wealth to its chest. Reasonable distribution of wealth is all that the majority of people want in their lives. But when they don't see that happening, then the scent of revolution hangs in the air.

 

I don't think that I would be far off the mark to say that the United States might sink into violent chaos and oblivion by 2050.

[willedoo]

2 minutes ago, old man emu said:

I don't think that I would be far off the mark to say that the United States might sink into violent chaos and oblivion by 2050.

Everything seems to be pointing that way. I think they would need a complete U-turn in their thinking to prevent it. Let's see - 2050. If I keep eating my greens and don't fall off the roof, I'd be 95. Might just see it yet. If the U.S. shrivels in power, something will fill the void. Best case scenario would be a multi - polar world with the Europeans, Russians and Chinese all cooperating for peace. If the U.S. doesn't get on track, they'll be relegated to being the dunce in the corner. Where does that leave Australia? We'll have to find other coat tails to hang on to.

 

What would be the 2050 worst case scenario? Perhaps a weak U.S. & E.U. and a strong China behaving unfairly.

[old man emu]

The EU could fall apart due to the traditional enmity between its two most powerful members - France and Germany. I reckon that's one European war that Britain will decline the invitation to participate in.

[willedoo]

Breaking News: Russia invades Russia. The exercises in Belarus have finished on schedule, the tanks are being loaded on trains and are heading home, as was planned months ago. Doesn't make American Intelligence look very intelligent. The term is an oxymoron anyway. Vladimir Vladimirovich must be cacking himself.

[willedoo]

In other news, the Ukrainian President has decreed the American dream date of invasion as Unity Day. Februrary 16th. will now be a day of flying flags, playing the anthem and getting up to all sorts of patriotic adventures. Sounds like tomorrow will hardly be a day where the Ukrainians are trembling in their boots waiting for the T-90's to come clattering over the border. Somehow I think they're taking the p*ss out of the yanks.

 

Outlets like Bloomberg will have to run articles about how Biden stared down the Russians and won. It's the only way they can spin being caught out bullsh*tting.

[old man emu]

Three cheers for Comrade Putin. 

 

Captain, The President has forced their retreat

[Jerry_Atrick]

As usual, there is always more than meets the eyes on these things. Depending on what side of the fence you sit, it is a victory. For Russia, it was a victory for exposing the western propaganda machine. For the west, it was a victory as it made Russia think twice before advancing over the border.. Russia, or Vlado, is reported to press that Ukraine should never join Nato and that Western forces should retreat from Eastern European countries.

 

I personally think, at the moment, it is a delay of a much bigger crisis. The east feels the west is weakened, and maybe they were taken by a bit of surprise by the response, especially after the Crimea, and the European reliance on the Nord Stream pipeline. Vlado is quoted as saying that liberalism is now obsolete; it is definitely under threat, but obsolete is not quite there, yet.

 

I know there is a Minsk agreement, and jeepers, the second one is a hotch-potch and seems to be aimed more at a ceasefire than a sustainable solution: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2020/05/minsk-conundrum-western-policy-and-russias-war-eastern-ukraine-0/minsk-2-agreement

 

Interestingly, the Ukranians don't seem to be too interested in joining Russia. And regardless of an agreement made, some could argue, under duress, I am not sure that Russia is acting particularly in good faith, either. In fact, one of the problems that I can see is Russia's objection to the Ukraine in joining Nato as they see it as a threat. Nato's constitution requires it to act as a defensive force only; in fact it was one of the reasons why all Nato forces did not take up residence in the Ukraine.. they were saying, due to whatever status the Ukraine holds with Nato, Nato will come to its defence. Note, there have been donations of hardware to the Ukraine by Nato states, but they were not acting in the capacity of Nato.

 

 

Similarly the invasion of Afghanistan, etc. were not NATO initiatives, even though some (not all) Nato countries joined in - and some non-Nato countries (er, Australia). There id as much posturing and attempt at reclaiming the good ol' USSR as there is honouring an almost impossible agreement to honour.

 

The question really is, is the Ukraine a sovereign nation? It's hard to really answer.. But, it is not a part of Russia and it would seem, despite a decent chunk of its population being of Russian heritage. The term, Russian minority (or, as in Cyprus, the Turkish minority) inflames the debate. .If we go back to the 70s, was it the Greek or Italian minority, or was it Australians of Meditaranean extraction (or New Australians, or any of the derogatory labels that were applied)? Nope, I don't think Russia is acting in good faith, and part of this was a test of the resolve of Western nations (as are the continual near incursions of Western European airspace by Russian military planes - which are also intelligence gathering exercises).

 

Re the USA.. yep - they are assholes. But there haven't been too many imperial nations/empires that haven't been, Britain included. Having said that, I am glad, in many respects, that the USA held the balance of power during my lifetime compared to Russia, or emerging China. Look at how Russia treats its own citizens in its period of renaissance - violent suppression is best I can describe of any dissent; Many countries have not agreed with the US and the US have not gone to war with them - the most stark I can think of is our eastern neighbour, but many APAC countries, and indeed, the middle east (although, there is a definite incentive with the ME).

 

Then people say China doesn't have anything more than regional aspirations. Absolute tosh. Forgetting the allegations of interference in Australia, Europe, and to a lesser degree, the US, have we forgotten the Belt ans Silk Road initiative. China has learned that waging war is not the best way to get authority - money speaks far greater than munitions in the longer term. Ask yourself this - if the Russia or China are to become the next power, would life be better? You may think so, but I certainly don't. And look at their military build up and artificial island building program to artificially extend their territorial waters. All (or at least the vast majority) of those islands are military installations to boot.. and it is not for defence, as there has not been any expression of aggression towards China in years.

 

The US is on a downward spiral - no question. It, like every empire before it (including the British) is too stupid to realise it and do something about it. Although an absolute atheist, I pray NZ rise to be the next power and both China and Russia lose much of their influence (as does the US).

 

And yes, the west is f'n stoopid for allowing absolute greed to get in the way to become economically reliant on either Russia or China.. it is called concentration risk and I have been calling it out on banks books for years.

Edited February 15, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[facthunter]

Vlad gets his rocks off with power demo's and it rusts on his support base at home. Having said that, the US was NEVER going to allow a system to exist that challenged its 100% Capitalist dogma that enabled IT to control the whole world by TRADE arrangements that over ruled the will of an Elected Government.. Chuck the Godly and Godless  BULL$#it into the equation and you have what is wrong with the Logic. of the American WAY of life being the example to which WE ALL should aspire. Rubbish to that. God's own is for them alone. The $ standard means a discount on everything world wide for Americans. No wonder so any want(ed) to go and live there. NOT NOW though.  It's future looks decidedly troubled and because of that the whole world is destabilised and threatened by 300 million people.  of about 7 billion world wide. Population growth would have to be the BIG issue eventually if not already. Nev

[nomadpete]

Cheer up Nev. It's all starting to get to you. It's all out of our hands, and the best we can do is 'ride the bastrd all the way into the crash'.

[willedoo]

I think what Vladimir is doing is as Nev says, a power demo. He's just showing his hand to remind the Americans that not all of their plans will go unchallenged. I don't subscribe to the theory that Putin wants to recreate a Soviet Union style conglomerate. All the talk about Ukraine and Russia being as one is just political waffle for the masses. The reality is, he doesn't really give a stuff about Ukraine, it's missiles and their locality that interests him.

 

As he rightfully says, his number one job and priority is the national security and defence of a country of 145 million people. In the past cold war era, MAD served the world well as a deterrent, but in recent years there's been attempts by both sides at upsetting the balance and gaining the upper hand. Both sides, Russia and NATO/US, have engaged in exaggeration of the threats and a liberal sprinkling of BS and hype.

 

One example is Putin's objections to extra NATO troops in the Baltics. The numbers there are hardly a flea on the Bear's bum. The only thing that really threatens Russia is strategic missile bases and air bases capable of launching ALBM's within range of Russia. The presence of a few under-supplied battalions of foot soldiers in the Baltics is a joke more than anything, and certainly no threat to Russia. One only has to recall the experiences of Hitler and Napoleon.

 

The whole thing is a crock anyway. In the event of nuclear war, land based nukes are only a part of a complete disaster for the world. Putin is reacting to missile bases in Romania and Poland in the exact same way as the US would react to Russian bases in Cuba. The fact is that there's enough SLMB's lurking under the water to destroy the world many times over. Arguing over land bases is really just peripheral. At present, Russia has two heavily armed submarines, one off each coast of the US about 200 miles out in international waters. They have enough warheads on board to obliterate the US within a very short delivery time. A third one is rumoured to be in the area but not verified. The Americans have the same deal in waters close to Russia. It makes all the current headline grabbing events look like they really are, just politics playing out

 

Vladimir knows very well that NATO can never back down on their constitution of accepting applications from any country who wishes to join. He's just playing the old game of asking for more than he expects to receive. That way, when he gets offered less, the opposition think they've had a win and he gets what he wants.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Nev - my point is that the US is (now a crumbling) empire. And, as with empires past, they don't want any threats taking that away from and they will use what means they deem most effective. Religion, which is the alternate polity and ultimately tribalism, is the way those in power obtain servitude and also strike the fear of god (literally) into the subservients in order to motivate them to fight against an unknown enemy. Let's face it, if my stomach was full and I felt (relatively) safe, I wouldn't really heed the call to uncle Sam, or any other regime. But strike the fear that the other fellas are about to launch an attack, rape the missus and eat the kids (sound familiar to any  Q'Anon people??) then, if you can get me to believe it through the moutpeice of some mythical creature I believe holds the key to eternal salvation, I may just be motivated to protect my family.

 

And while communism is supposed to despise religion, anyone care to guess the power of the Russian Orthodox Church? Admittedly, China does wage war against religion, but that is probably more an admission that religion is the alternate polity and the CCP don't like any threats.

 

Wille - Yes - some of it is a power demo - but as I mention, often there is more than meets the eye. Some of this would have been intelligence gathering, for example, how fast his "enemies" can mobilise, and how they mobilise which will feed into the tactical strategies they concoct. Also, where maths and money go hand in hand, you are likely to find a couple of Rouskis and banking is no exception (ironically, my last discussion with an Aussie bank about work was with a Rouski who led the team)... and the couple at work who are in the UK less than 5 years seem to be of the opinion the local rhetoric is aimed at justifying a land grab. They may be stoking the conversation - who knows - but I can't help but think an annexation and a belief that an adjacent territory is yours would give you justification to go for it (if you were Vlado, or any other leader with ambitions, of course). International pissing contests aren't just about who can pee the highest in the school urinals.

 

I will reiterate - if I had a choice about which three superpowers I would live under, I would still take the USA (well, before it started to crumble). They did batpoo crazy stuff, but so have every empire past.. they still afforded those much more lattitude before raining on their party than Russia or China would ever tolerate...

[old man emu]

While Putin's mantra is to make the Ukraine once again part of the Russian Nation, and the USA says he wants it because of its importance to provide military sites, you have to look deeper into the benefits of having the Ukraine under Russia's governance.

 

As much as two-thirds of Ukraine's surface land consists of the extremely fertile Ukrainian black earth (chernozems), a resource that has made Ukraine one of the most fertile regions in the world and well known as a "breadbasket". These soils may be divided into three broad groups:

1. In the north, a belt of deep chernozems, about 5 feet (1.5 metres) thick and rich in humus

2. In the south and east of the group 1, a zone of prairie, or ordinary, chernozems, which are equally rich in humus but only about 3 feet (0.91 metres) thick

3. The southernmost belt, which is even thinner and has still less humus.

 

These are grassland soils just like the North American wheatbelt which stretches from the U.S. state of Kansas through the Canadian Prairie Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. This vast area of the Great Plains allows wheat to be cultivated in both winter and spring. And to some degree the same as Australian and Argentinian wheat belt areas.

 

Control of the grain produce of these wheat lands is important to each of the countries mentioned. The first task of any government is to ensure that its people can be fed. That's why the Germans made war against Britain with submarines, and why the Allies embargoed food supplies to Germany in WWII.

[facthunter]

When Marxism was formulated the Church had near total control over the  empire CZAR. To change anything that nexus had to go. USA talks about GODLESS and axis of EVIL. North Korea has every reason to regard the US as  the MAJOR threat to it's existence. Nev