but I do agree that American politics seem to be promoting conflict with Russia (and vice versa). It's the same old brinksmanship that the world suffered through during the cold-war era.
The cold war was safer though because both sides worked to reduce tensions and build trust.Nowadays the opposite is hapenning: you have the US constantly deliberately ramping up tensions and provocations.
While the governments of many European countries have their own issues (they can be pretty bloated), at least they have something that approximates real democracy: one can honestly pick and choose from a smorgasbord of platforms.
Quote from: Mr.DeMartino on Yesterday at 01:40:32 Trump is a liar and a con man.
Quote from Mr.DeMartino on June 14, 2019 at 02:28:07 Donald Trump is a lying sack of shit
Not every Democrat is the same. Not every Republican is the same. Some are centrists. Some are mavericks. They are all over the political spectrum.
White House is now confirming that there is no evidence of any wiretapping of Trump. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/us/politics/white-house-trump-wiretap-obama.html
True, but you're still stuck with only 2 platforms come election time.
Quote from: kyndo on March 09, 2017, 02:23:52 pmTrue, but you're still stuck with only 2 platforms come election time. Trump/Bannon are alt right. The "two" parties morph over time to take any shape they want. This isn't "republican", a weird third party gained support and actually got in.
If I were Russia I'd largely be doing what they are doing now which is to defend their core interests, develop cost effective and asymmetric threats and counters, and try and do something about this NeoConNeoLib wave that wants to crush all before it because its clear that the Bush-Clintonites want to bring Russia to its knees.
This is definitely the case in the US: it was "Hilary or Trump", not "Hilary, Trump, or-that-other-bloke-who-seems-comparatively-reasonable".
Quote from: kyndo on March 09, 2017, 03:22:15 pmThis is definitely the case in the US: it was "Hilary or Trump", not "Hilary, Trump, or-that-other-bloke-who-seems-comparatively-reasonable". Hilary = much better than Trump...just as Gore = much better than George W. Bush. To say both candidates are equally bad is foolish. Clinton is highly intelligent, very sane, and slow to act rash. The Russian propaganda slandered her and you guys fell for it though.
Clinton is less of a corporate shill for big business than Trump is.
The US needs people like Bernie.
White House is now confirming that there is no evidence of any wiretapping of Trump. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/us/politics/white-house-trump-wiretap-obama.htmlI guess the usual Trumptrolls will no be claiming that Trump himself and Shawn Spicy are "fake news" so they don't have to explain why they were disagreeing with reality.
“had my wires tapped in Trump Tower.” http://www.businessinsider.com/r-trump-alleges-wire-tapping-by-obama-during-campaign-2017-3
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/us/politics/white-house-trump-wiretap-obama.htmlWASHINGTON — White House officials declared on Wednesday that President Trump was not the target of an investigation, five days after Mr. Trump himself raised the prospect with an unsubstantiated claim that his predecessor ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower.But after an aide slipped Mr. Spicer a note, he circled back to clarify that “there is no reason to believe there is any type of investigation with respect to the Department of Justice.”
When factoring in NATO, whatever marginal (and it is very marginal) edge Russia may or may not have with tanks or artillery, is more than made up for by the combined weight of the U.S., France, Spain, Britain, Italy, Germany, the Dutch, and Poland.
Because defense is easier than attack, most attacking military forces require a 3:1 superiority ratio to have a reasonable shot at victory. The current ratio in the Baltics is more than 4:1, and NATO forces on the ground field considerably less firepower than their Russian counterparts.
The Russian military could defeat NATO forces in the Baltics in just 60 hourshttp://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a21344/us-claims-russia-could-defeat-nato-in-60-hours/
Russia Defeats America in Every NATO War Game ScenarioSince mid-2014 the Pentagon has run all manner of war games – as many as 16 times, under different scenarios – pitting NATO against Russia. All scenarios were favorable to NATO. All simulations yielded the same victor: Russia.”http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-conflict/2015/12/russia-defeats-america-in-every-nato-war-game-scenario-2459562.html
I'm not sure if it was safer. I think it was an explosively (pun!) dangerous situation that was managed and ultimately reduced through vast amounts of effort. The whole capitalist/communist war of ideologies was pretty viscous -- true believers are always the most dangerous. Sure, nowadays we're heading back to conflict, but I feel that it's a conflict driven more by the desire for wealth, influence, and power. While I agree that the world isn't exactly in a safe place with Russia and the States back at each other's throats, I feel that there is more potential for a non-violent resolution for a conflict driven by greed than for one driven by ideology. The players might be the same (ish), but their roles have changed: they're now merchants, not fundamentalists.