Thistle
Well-known member
I am proposing the easiest most rational solution the one that would absolutely be chosen according to Occam's razor. There's nothing conspiratorial about my attributions of actions to the obvious facts.
Do you support war with Russia?
- Thread starter Thistle
- Start date
Thistle
Well-known member
And we haven't fought war since World War II; do you have a point?
Thistle
Well-known member
I'm aware of that. Someone has gotten to Kissinger and given him a copy of the updated hymnal. In the end when it comes to the Washington elite their final life boat is the fact that they're Washington elite. They're planning on getting in one of those lifeboats. The last thing you want if you're 90 something is to be voted off the island.Kissinger now says Ukraine should capture all of its property back and join NATO.Do you agree with Kissinger or not?
Kissinger, who was instrumental to U.S. Cold War policy toward the Soviet Union when he served under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, has long said Ukraine should remain neutral and not join NATO. Despite this, he said at Davos that the country joining the Transatlantic alliance could be an "appropriate outcome" of Russia's invasion
Kissinger said that Ukraine should recapture territory that has been annexed by Russia while holding negotiations to end the war, which has been going for nearly 11 months
Henry Kissinger's shifting views on Ukraine
The former U.S. secretary of state and national security advisor previously insisted Kyiv should be neutral and not join NATO.www.newsweek.com
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
Perhaps Kissinger is just a smart man and is stating the obvious.
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
You seem to get most of your talking points from Putin.Im just reminding you this is a special military option for the purpose of removing the oppressing Nazi party that has taken over and controlling Ukraine.
Thistle
Well-known member
I don't think you have a very good grasp of how to measure intelligence. If you correctly predict a war years in advance and correctly identify the reasons it came about that is the very definition of demonstrated competence and intelligence. Intelligence is not the explanation for reversing your position after you've already been proven absolutely correct. I'm afraid you wouldn't make a very good scientist.
Thistle
Well-known member
I don't think you understand the difference between coherent arguments that are able to persuade, and talking points which are simply a smoke screen to fill a buster and otherwise investigatory pursuit of the truth. A talking point is pure rhetoric in service of obfuscation where an argument is an essential tool of thinking. Argument is where we test refine and adjust our idea so that ultimately our ideas are clear and realistic.
Now, Putin is a source of information about what Putin thinks. It would be rather foolish to ignore what Putin says about what Putin thinks. The first question that you might have to ask when Putin talks about what he thinks is whether or not it seems arbitrary or capricious. Most of what he says about what he thinks is manifestly reasonable and rational and if attributed to anybody else would have to be taken that way. What he says about what he thinks does in fact explain the actions that he has taken.
From an analytical perspective I think that what John Mearsheimer has said on the subject makes perfect sense and explains everything that we observe. Colonel McGregor and Scott Ritter both have connections in these areas where they can get information that is not filtered through our own propaganda net work. Our media is reliant on our political power elite for access, and our political power elite are reliant on our industrial military elite financially, and that does not inspire a great deal of confidence.
The persecution of Russian speaking Ukrainians at the hands of Ukrainian speaking Nazis is very well documented and not in dispute. I'm sure too many ordinary Russians that is rather galling and the idea that it would be used in part to sell this military action to ordinary Russians is not surprising. But ultimately foreign policy decisions including war have to do with national interest supreme of which is national security. That is the primary reason for this action on the part of Russia.
If anything would fall into the obvious category of "talking points" it's the kind of responses that I'm getting back from you and people on your side of this question.
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
He didn't reverse his position.
As you said ,he said this would happen.Now he is saying what should happen next now that this has happened.
Kissinger knows what he's talking about.
Last edited:
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
Like I said,you take all your talking points from Putin.
Putin says Nazis have taken over Ukraine and he is going to remove them from power so you try to explain how a few Ukrainians in one small group threatens Putin and that gives Putin the right to kill thousands of non Nazis trying to find those Nazis that you say still exists.
Ukraines president is a jew and there were never any Nazis in power.But you still insist that this is good cause to start a war.
Since this was obviously not working for Putin and he has since moved on from that lie,perhaps it's time you should too.
The new lie is that Russia is trying to stop the war that it didn't start.Perhaps you should try to push Putin new narrative that Putin didn't start this war with his special military operation.
Someone else started it.
Some people just like being laughed at.
Thistle
Well-known member
Henry Kissinger says if Ukraine tries to join NATO there will be a war in Eastern Europe. At the encouragement and almost insistence of the United States Ukraine never stopped blabbing about joining NATO and the EU and the war that Henry Kissinger predicted in fact happened. In acknowledging this point you're acknowledging that the primary fault for Russia's invasion of Ukraine is US policy that precipitated it. The run up to this is decades long so it's not like we didn't know in advance.
This becomes a political calculation not an analytical one. I'm quite sure that the best thing for Henry Kissinger is to go along with the foreign policy establishment and the rand corporation in the Washington think tanks and everybody who is shoveling money to the best politicians that money can buy. But that's hardly an example of analytical thinking. At most charitable, it's pragmatic thinking.
Which is being memorialized in a state funeral hopefully with a flag draped coffin in the capital rotunda. He will not have to live long in the world that these policy missteps are going to create.
Thistle
Well-known member
I really don't understand why people engage in rhetorical bludgeoning like you're doing right here. Is thinking really so difficult that you simply can't engage in the enterprise at all?
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
You must really hate now that henry Kissinger was right seeing he he says Ukraine should join NATO .That would not serve Russia which is trying to expand into Ukraine.
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
The problem is ,is your not thinking.Your just repeating what Putin tells you.
Putin says Ukraine is controlled by Nazis ,so you try your best to believe it even though it's an outright lie.
Ukraine elected a jew as president and still you believe they are Nazis.
Use common sense for once.
Fact it Putin is trying to expand Russia's and his own influence.He wants to restore the former Soviet Union.You chose to believe his lies about his reasons but anyone with half a brain already knows what Putin wants.
He wants to be Peter the great.
He has failed miserably and will be remembered as the tyrant he is and a total failure.
Thistle
Well-known member
The problem has been obvious to a lot of people for a long time.
Neutrality for Ukraine Is the Right Answer - Antiwar.com Original
The best solution to the current Ukraine crisis is for all parties to agree to Ukrainian neutrality, but this is exactly what Western governments and the - Daniel Larison for Antiwar.com Original
original.antiwar.com
Thistle
Well-known member
I'm sure if I tried hard enough to get an unfiltered reading on what Putin is saying it could conceivably be accomplished, but if you've been able to find a reliable way to do that I'm not aware of it off the cuff. So no, I don't have a hotline Putin.
Thistle
Well-known member
Your infantile nonresponsive bludgeoning is not interesting. Are you deliberately trying to kill this thread?
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
Your the one who brought up Henry Kissinger because of what he said ,now you wanting to stop talking about Henry Kissinger because of what he said.
roflol
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
Putin-The problem has been obvious to a lot of people for a long time.
Neutrality for Ukraine Is the Right Answer - Antiwar.com Original
The best solution to the current Ukraine crisis is for all parties to agree to Ukrainian neutrality, but this is exactly what Western governments and the - Daniel Larison for Antiwar.com Original
“Apparently, it is also our lot to return [what is Russia’s] and strengthen [the country]. And if we proceed from the fact that these basic values form the basis of our existence, we will certainly succeed in solving the tasks that we face
Thistle
Well-known member
Obviously not. Anyone who reads post 110 can see that is not the case. Rather than actually responding to coherent content you've denigrated the conversation into incoherent bludgeoning which is not responsive to the positive arguments that I've laid on the table.
Shilohsfoal
Well-known member
You brought up Henry Kissinger in post 90.
20 posts before 110 that is.
Yet you read Henry Kissinger says Ukraine should be in NATO,then you changed you tune.
lol