3 ms·

Today's comically poorly run US is spinning up huge pork barrel spending on pointless weapons while the Russians have a dictator who thrives on stories of immin

Today's comically poorly run US is spinning up huge pork barrel spending on pointless weapons while the Russians have a dictator who thrives on stories of imminent danger. It's quite symbiotic. Thus the super-fuze vs Sarmat issue. It is not because Putin thinks the current US administration is going to fling nukes at him at any second. Similarly, if the US has an administration so biddable that you can sail into Chesapeake bay and poke around with impunity, why not do so? It will sure look good in Russia when you're caught. And just as with this rather mild news story, I'm sure there is some tu quoque justification for the invasion of Ukraine and the poisoning of Sergei Skripal that we would hear should those stories get posted. So regrettably, as long as the Russians have Putin they will get poorer every day and to distract them we all will edge closer to another cold war. If the US and UK dropped of the planet tomorrow then he would rail against Germany and the Baltic States instead.

eesmith 9y ago
I do not share your belief that the US, which is currently involved in numerous wars, will never use its "pointless weapons." Nixon, for example, thought about nuking Vietnam: > We’re going to do it. I’m going to destroy the goddamn country, believe me, I mean destroy it if necessary. And let me say, even the nuclear weapons if necessary. It isn’t necessary. But, you know, what I mean is, what shows you the extent to which I’m willing to go. By a nuclear weapon, I mean that we will bomb the living bejeezus out of North Vietnam and then if anybody interferes we will threaten the nuclear weapons. Nixon: I’d rather use the nuclear bomb. Have you got that ready? Kissinger: That, I think, would just be too much. Nixon: A nuclear bomb, does that bother you?… I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christ’s sake! The only place where you and I disagree is with regard to the bombing. You’re so goddamned concerned about civilians, and I don’t give a damn. I don’t care. Kissinger: I’m concerned about the civilians because I don’t want the world to be mobilized against you as a butcher. I see no reason to believe that the US in the future will not ever make that step. The US "huge pork barrel spending" also make us poorer every day. My complaint here is to point out the hypocrisy and weakness of US claims, not the use of that hypocrisy to justify Russian behavior.
- TomMckenny 9y ago
  Which again is a quote from 50 years ago and about Vietnam. And Vietnam clearly no longer feels like it's going to be nuked at any second. Instead it is increasingly friendly to other nations. As was Russia until Putin took over making his country slowly but steady more and more like North Korea every day. If the Russians wish to ruin their lives by having an economy destroying and soul crushing dictator, that is their business. But Putin's internet puppets are not going to make the outside world comfortable with having military grade poisons released in their country or arms sent to the Taliban or extremest candidates clandestinely supported just by endless repeating "Look what Nixon did"
  - eesmith 9y ago
    Despite your implications, I am not an apologist for Russian state behavior, and I don't see why you seem to bring it up. What, of what I wrote, has implied otherwise? I am calling out American hypocrisy. Is it possible to do that without being called an internet puppet? We look at history to see what the US does and how presidents think does because newer records are still secret, and increasingly so. Why are we spending billions on nuclear weapons we'll never need? How much do we spend on making plans to take out the undersea cables of other countries? Does that spending improve our economy?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - TomMckenny 9y ago
      When a criticism of the US (or any free country) is raised, the discussion is multifaceted. The conversation is never overwhelmed with by "calling out Russian hypocrisy" implying both that the post is from them and no one anywhere should object. To your other point, I agree money should not be wasted on unnecessary military spending nor should any nation cut or spy on under sea cables.

eesmith 9y ago

I do not share your belief that the US, which is currently involved in numerous wars, will never use its "pointless weapons." Nixon, for example, thought about nuking Vietnam: > We’re going to do it. I’m going to destroy the goddamn country, believe me, I mean destroy it if necessary. And let me say, even the nuclear weapons if necessary. It isn’t necessary. But, you know, what I mean is, what shows you the extent to which I’m willing to go. By a nuclear weapon, I mean that we will bomb the living bejeezus out of North Vietnam and then if anybody interferes we will threaten the nuclear weapons. Nixon: I’d rather use the nuclear bomb. Have you got that ready? Kissinger: That, I think, would just be too much. Nixon: A nuclear bomb, does that bother you?… I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christ’s sake! The only place where you and I disagree is with regard to the bombing. You’re so goddamned concerned about civilians, and I don’t give a damn. I don’t care. Kissinger: I’m concerned about the civilians because I don’t want the world to be mobilized against you as a butcher. I see no reason to believe that the US in the future will not ever make that step. The US "huge pork barrel spending" also make us poorer every day. My complaint here is to point out the hypocrisy and weakness of US claims, not the use of that hypocrisy to justify Russian behavior.

TomMckenny 9y ago
Which again is a quote from 50 years ago and about Vietnam. And Vietnam clearly no longer feels like it's going to be nuked at any second. Instead it is increasingly friendly to other nations. As was Russia until Putin took over making his country slowly but steady more and more like North Korea every day. If the Russians wish to ruin their lives by having an economy destroying and soul crushing dictator, that is their business. But Putin's internet puppets are not going to make the outside world comfortable with having military grade poisons released in their country or arms sent to the Taliban or extremest candidates clandestinely supported just by endless repeating "Look what Nixon did"
- eesmith 9y ago
  Despite your implications, I am not an apologist for Russian state behavior, and I don't see why you seem to bring it up. What, of what I wrote, has implied otherwise? I am calling out American hypocrisy. Is it possible to do that without being called an internet puppet? We look at history to see what the US does and how presidents think does because newer records are still secret, and increasingly so. Why are we spending billions on nuclear weapons we'll never need? How much do we spend on making plans to take out the undersea cables of other countries? Does that spending improve our economy?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - TomMckenny 9y ago
    When a criticism of the US (or any free country) is raised, the discussion is multifaceted. The conversation is never overwhelmed with by "calling out Russian hypocrisy" implying both that the post is from them and no one anywhere should object. To your other point, I agree money should not be wasted on unnecessary military spending nor should any nation cut or spy on under sea cables.