|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
Economics |
All I can say is…February 25th, 2025 |
 43 comments to All I can say is…Leave a Reply |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
President Reagan did not tend to curse – he had a mid West childhood with a leftist father (who was also an alcoholic and a New Deal WPA, Works Projects Administration, activist), and a religious conservative mother. Having to drag (literally) his drunk father home from bars (where the father spent the taxpayer money he was given) may have influenced the beliefs (for example, he choose to be a Protestant like his mother – not a Catholic like his father) and politics of Ronald Reagan – but he did vote for Franklin Roosevelt four times. He never used bad language about his father, indeed he hardly ever used bad language about anyone. Donald Trump’s brother was an alcoholic – he seems to have had a similar attitude towards him as Ronald Reagan had about his father, compassion but also a determination not-to-be-like-him (more extreme in the case of Donald Trump – he does not drink at all).
One horrible fact – Ronald Reagan watched both his mother and his elder brother die of alzheimers – so when he got this disease, he knew exactly what would eventually happen to him.
As for Ukraine – Ronald Reagan was born in 1911, the Ukraine at that time was part of the Russian Empire, as it had been for centuries (the Russians had defeated the Ottoman Empire – and the Poles and Swedes), indeed such cities as Odessa had been created by Russians and were, at-that-time, overwhelmingly Russian.
It is true that some Ukrainians (most likely a small minority in 1911) maintained that Ukraine should be an independent country. This idea had even been used as a legal defense when some Ukrainians had sided with the Swedes under Peter the Great in the early 1700s (“we are not traitors to Russia – because we are NOT Russian”) – the (Russian) courts rejected the defense and hanged (as traitors) those Ukrainians who had taken up arms with the Swedish King Charles.
The British government did a similar thing to William Joyce (“Lord Haw-Haw”) who was hanged for treason to the United Kingdom (he broadcast for the Germans during World War II) – in spite of his legal defense that was not British (that he was Irish) and, therefore, could not be guilty of treason to Britain. The, British, courts ruled that he was British – and, therefore, had committed treason, because he was born when Ireland was part of the United Kingdom.
President Zelensky was born when the Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and is a native Russian speaker (Ukrainian is his second language) – I can well understand why he does not want to face “justice” (so called justice) in a Russian court.
But the world changes – what would have seemed bizarre in 1911 (or even in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan was President) and was NOT a war aim of the British government during the Crimean War (contrary to what is now claimed – there was no aim to “liberate Kiev from the Russians” in the 1850s – or later, as the British and French, at-that-time, considered Kiev, let alone Crimea – which had never been Ukrainian, to be part of Russia) is now a reality – and has to be accepted.
Perhaps because of the savage treatment Ukrainians received under the Marxist Soviet Union, when many MILLIONS of Ukrainians were slaughtered (and it was NOT just under Stalin – it started under Lenin), the idea of union with Russia is a non-starter now.
Mr Putin was born in 1952 – for the first 30 years of his life Ukraine was part of his country – different yes, but not more so than Wales is from England, he can not seem to find the mental flexibility to accept that Ukraine is no longer part of his country, and-never-will-be again.
If Mr Putin can not accept that Ukraine is now an independent country, real independence not nominal independence, then he will have to be replaced by a younger generation of leadership in Russia who can accept the world as it now is.
Kiev will NEVER be part of Russia again. And Mr Putin’s savage invasion, and three years of savage war, means that some areas of Ukraine that were pro union with Russia a few years ago – will NEVER be part of Russia again.
I remember listening to a man, a native Russian speaker – he could not even speak Ukrainian as a second language, saying he had always been confused as to whether he was Russian or Ukrainian – but then Mr Putin destroyed his home town, and that had decided him.
He, the man, decided that he was Ukrainian.
There are many men and women like him.
Destroy the towns and cities of people and they do NOT want to be part of your country – even if they were open to that idea before you acted like a savage criminal.
This Mr Putin needs to understand – or, if he refuses to understand, he needs to be replaced by a new Russian leadership who does understand.
A new leadership is needed in Russia who will deal with the real threat to Russia, to the Russian people – that threat is not, and had never been, Ukrainians. The real threat to the Russian people (now depleted of hundreds of thousands of young men – whose lives have been thrown away by Mr Putin in his pointless vanity project war) – the real threat to the Russian people are the forces that Mr Putin has allied with – and which are now increasingly seen in Russia.
Russians need to ask themselves – do you want Russian cities to end up like, for example, Birmingham in the United Kingdom? Do you want end up outnumbered in your cities and towns (towns as well – for it will not stop at the cities).
If the answer is “no” – then the real threat to the Russian people, the policies of Mr Putin – and Mr Putin himself, need to be terminated.
As for Ukraine – the Ukrainians are, rightly, concentrating on the threat from Mr Putin.
But that is not the only threat to Ukraine – to the Ukrainian people.
The policy of the European Union, and the rest of the “international community”, is not to destroy nation-states such as Ukraine by bullets and bombs (like Mr Putin), but their policy is still to destroy Ukraine and all other Western nation-states – but by other means (as has been been increasingly obvious since the 1960s).
Partly by promoting anti birth policies (and Mr Putin, and other Soviet types, have done the same thing – look at the abortion rate in Russia, and the policies that basically FORCE women to go out to work outside the home) – leading to demographic collapse, and (presented as the “answer” to demographic collapse) promoting mass migration from other parts of the world.
Mr Putin is the obvious threat – in that he is a vicious criminal, but the “international community” (the E.U. and so on) may prove to be a deadly long term threat. Hopefully Ukrainians will reject Mr Putin – AND will reject the E.U., U.N., and the rest of the “international community” with its agenda of destroying Western nation states. The policy of destroying Western peoples – including the Ukrainians.
Reagan would be looking in horror at some of the things said by the 47th POTUS, and in particular, the repeated smears against Zelensky. He’d have been unimpressed by all the rationalisations, the excuses, the BS about Trump playing “four-D chess”, and so on. Yes, he would have recognised that this war has to end, but he’d make the point that peace has to be attained by making everyone understand the costs of starting another war. And that emphatically means making it clear that the overwhelming moral blame for this lies in Moscow. For example, I can see Reagan agreeing with this New York Post editorial from Douglas Murray, who has been similarly robust in his views about Israel and Oct 7. https://nypost.com/2025/02/20/opinion/putin-is-the-dictator-and-10-ukraine-russia-war-truths-we-ignore-at-our-peril/
It may be that a deal is struck that makes it clear to Putin, and the criminals and thugs in his regime, that what happened three years ago cannot be repeated. Trump might yet surprise us all. A problem, however, is that Putin is caught in a trap of his own creation: to be seen to back down without a “win” means he’s a dead man. There are plenty of hardliners in Russia who are even nastier than he is. That is why I think we have to pursue a containment policy now against Russia, and that obviously means big spending hikes on defence. (For those of us in the UK, I would focus on things like building more submarines, frigates, and anti-missile systems and also work on areas such as drone counter-measures, expanding reserves for all branches, more infantry, etc.)
By the way, in talking to friends about this who have, alas, fallen for some Russian talking points, I was reminded of this important essay, out a few days ago, about the myths surrounding events in Ukraine a decade ago – specifically, the Maidan revolts and ouster of a president. It is a long(ish) read but worth it.
Johnathan Peace – President Trump has never said he is playing Four D chess.
And he is President of the United States – not President of the Ukraine. Nor did President Reagan (as far as I know) argue that Ukraine should be independent – although I believe that Ukraine should be independent.
People from New York City, unlike people born in 1911 small town Illinois, use bad language – and then make deals with the people they have used bad language about.
Indeed President Trump is willing to make a deal with President Zelensky – even though he, President Trump, admits that the rare earth deposits and so on may well be worthless (“who the Hell knows if this is really worth anything” were the words) – as they will not be developed for a long time, if it all.
“Venting” before making a deal is what President Trump, and other people from his New York City culture, do before making a deal. Trying to salvage something from the spending over many years – spending that did not start in 2022 – as President Trump himself spent a lot of money arming and training Ukrainian forces from 2017 to 2020. Although the “sunk cost fallacy” should be remembered – just because one has spent a lot of money on a project, does not necessarily mean one should spend more money on the project.
Do I prefer a small town like Dixon Illinois in 1911 to New York City? Of course I do – but the United States has a President from New York City.
Be thankful the language was not a lot worse.
Finally there is the vast number of people killed or maimed on both sides – sadly only President Trump seems to care about them. No one else really seems to regard the killed or maimed, on both sides, as an important matter.
It may NOT be possible to end the war – but at least President Trump is trying to end it, no one else is.
From a public relations point of view trying to end the war is a MISTAKE – as any serious effort to end the war is going to get a lot of hate poured down on you (as President Trump just found out) – and, most likely, will not achieve anything.
As for President Reagan – he made a deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran and their “Party of God” puppets in Lebanon – people who had killed hundreds of Americans (and vast numbers of other people) and had tortured people, such as the CIA chief in Lebanon, till they went insane – I am not using a figure of speech, the man was returned mutilated and out of his mind, a reminder of “do not let them take you alive”.
So the late President Reagan is no guide in these matters. Especially as the “Party of God” in Lebanon remains as vicious as ever – as does the Islamic Republic of Iran itself.
I repeat – trying to end the Russian/Ukrainian war is, most likely, a mistake that will not achieve anything (especially as Mr Putin can-not-be-trusted to keep an agreement he makes), but President Trump thinks otherwise. Let us hope he is correct and I am wrong.
As for the alternative of thermonuclear war with Russia over Ukraine (at least with Ukraine as the official justification) – it is true that it would deal with the demographic transformation in Western cities (as, although they are spreading into smaller towns, most of the newcomers and their descendants, are in the cities) – but I think that the deaths of millions of people, of whatever ethnic group, is NOT morally acceptable.
I do not regard thermonuclear war, in relation to Ukraine, as an acceptable policy alternative – and I remind people that NATO membership rests, in the end, on the threat of thermonuclear war if a NATO member is attacked by a nuclear power.
“Paul – Ukraine itself had nuclear weapons and gave them up in return for empty promises, this was a mistake”.
That may well be true.
Paul, Mr Trump’s defenders and explainers often say that he is playing clever mental games. Or that it’s all s bluff, doesn’t mean it, etc etc. like you, Paul, I prefer people to say what they mean and mean what they say.
The 4-D chess deflection doesn’t work, anyway. Mr Trump has been consistent on certain things, such as tariffs, since he started to be a kind of public person.
A time for choosing. A time for a line not to be crossed, although it has already been.
As for the United Kingdom – the United Kingdom is no longer a great power, not economically (what matters is production – NOT “GDP” which is a measure of spending), nor militarily.
People may not like me pointing that out – but it is the truth.
Some people are amused by the delusions of grandeur that come out of the British government – but they are actually deeply concerning, they are not amusing at all.
The United Kingdom is a relatively small country, and is very densely populated – especially in the south east, and has no real defenses against attack. Nor is its economic position such that a large increase in military spending is practical.
The United Kingdom could not survive a thermonuclear exchange, it is not a matter of the United Kingdom being harmed by such an exchange – the United Kingdom would be destroyed by such an exchange.
Unfortunately the British government appears to not understand this.
Johnathan Pearce – I apologise for misunderstanding your comment about 4D Chess.
@Paul: Finally there is the vast number of people killed or maimed on both sides – sadly only President Trump seems to care about them. No one else really seems to regard the killed or maimed, on both sides, as an important matter. It may NOT be possible to end the war – but at least President Trump is trying to end it, no one else is.
That’s an incredible series of statements (I use the word “incredible” not as a usual superlative, but to state that your statement isn’t credible). How on earth can you know, with certainty, that “only” Mr Trump “seems to care about them”? Again, how can you state that “no one else” is trying to stop the war? Surely, the issue is how the war is stopped: with Putin and his regime being defeated, and seen to be defeated; an unsteady armistice that gives him time to recover and launch another invasion, or his winning territory and gaining incentives to gather more.
Your points about nuclear war and the changed demography of Western towns are teetering on the brink of something very ugly, Paul.
I have never seen anything as utterly craven as what Trump has done over Ukraine. He has astonished me. The USA had er… Trumps over Putin’s bust flush (to mix card metaphors) and then folded a full house. WTF is Trump playing at? Chamberlain appeased a genuine Class-A power. For good or ill (and that is debateable) but that is understandable. But this? God help us all, Trump has thrown all his mates under the bus for a fistful of lithium and even that score is dubious.
Paul, this really isn’t or shouldn’t be about the use of foul language. I am a Geordie brought up on Shakespeare (my Mum taught English) and Viz and trust me I have cussed a much more colourful streak than “WTF” over this.
Unless Trump is playing a 623 dimensional Mersenne Twister – forget 4D chess – (and I don’t think he is) he has granted the upper hand to an evil dictator of a tin-pot shithole which is, to be charitable, a fading regional power.
Forget about Ronnie – it’s enough to make Sun Tzu or Sid Meier vomit shittlers of inchoate rage.
I did not rejoice in the collapse of the mighty Soviet Union to see this utterly dismal surrender to the USSR’s dismal follow-through of a dime-store gangster regime. The West I believe in does not roll-over for a tummy-tickle from a pathetic botoxified despot.
A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day!
An hour of wolves and shattered shields, when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day!
This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good Earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!
I never thought I would see this day and yet I have. The USA has tossed in it’s chips and it hasn’t done that against a fallen Maia of Satanic power but against a mere Gollum.
Question: Correct me if I’m wrong, but when Russia was the USSR, didn’t Ukraine have a vote as a member of the General Assembly (or was it the Security Council), in keeping with the idea that it was a sovereign republic?
It would seem that Russia regarded Ukraine as a sovereign state — when it was convenient for Russia to do so.
P.S. I grew on the North Side of Chicago, where the “Ukrainian Village” neighborhood is located. Back then it really was still Ukrainian (the beautiful Ukrainian churches are still there, attended by Ukrainian-Americans who drive in from suburbs to take part in the services). I used to spend time in Ukie Village, hanging with sons and daughters of Ukie immigrants/refugees. The guys tended to be big fellows, and a disproportionate number of the girls were blond and beautiful (think Erika Eleniak in the cake scene in “Under Siege”). Which is why I liked hanging out in the Village. Anyway, in conversations with residents of the Village — especially with the parents and grandparents — I was made to understand in no uncertain terms that Ukraine was separate from Russia, and that Ukrainians were NOT Russians. Not incidentally in this regard, the old folks spoke Ukrainian, not Russian, in their homes.
There was no 4D chess. It’s exactly what it was and as surprising as ice in the arctic. You see the same pattern in damn near every Trump negotiation. If he wants something or you’re agreeing to what he wants then you’ll be heaped with superlatives. If you are obstructing something he wants or not playing ball then Trumps going to insult you then insult your mother. This is what Zelenskyy found out. I don’t believe it has any bearing on the outcome of any talks regarding cessation of hostilities. Rubio said as much in an interview yesterday or the day before.
We don’t venerate RWR because he was so anti-Russia.
We venerate him because he was so pro-USA.
Just remember, he hasn’t done anything yet. I could still be right.
That post, and many of the comments, could have been written yesterday.
We venerate him because he was so pro-USA.
I also venerate Ronald Reagan because he had, in so many ways, advanced human freedom abroad and at home. There is simply no politician on earth today who comes close to him. None. And he had his faults.
I don’t mind admitting that I misted up when I read he had died.
That is the wisest thing that i see written here, but i think that, perhaps, i might just be able to do better:
As for the comparison to Reagan: the latter could focus on international relations because the Deep State was not as powerful back then. Reagan did not need to untie his hands.
I was banned here a few years ago. Not sure if you guys will delete this comment and ban me again.
I love this blog and many writers here have had a significant impact on my thinking for many years. Much respect.
And I confess I was sad when I was banned here, always enjoy convos here.
I came back to read what people here are saying about the Ukraine conflict and to briefly chime in on this subject.
What has happened to Ukraine is ghastly. Trump is going to bring peace, which is what a majority of the Americans who voted for Trump want. I do wonder how many of those who now bemoan the prospect of peace in Ukraine still currently maintain that the 2003 Iraq invasion was a good thing or in Western/American interests to do?
Best wishes
What was bloodier: the Vietnam War or the Vietnam Peace?
What was worse for the Russians: the First World War and Civil War or the “peace” that followed them?
What was worse for the English: the Battle of Hastings or Norman rule?
Andrew Neil (of all people) is the only media talking-head in UK / Europe who seems to get it. For the US China and it’s active preparation for war in or after 2027 is the US’s primary military problem. Not Russia. Thats now Europe’s problem.
Europe had the last decade since 2014 to build back its military. It did not. So its tough luck for Europe now.
Due to the last four years the US is at its weakest politically and economically since the 1930’s. As bad as 1934/1935. An out of control deficit. National debt exploded almost 50% in last 4 years. And the Democratic Party has totally imploded into a very dangerous organization not seen since the 1850’s. In big states / cities I see little difference between how the Democratic Party operates and United Russia. In conjunction with organized crime gangs and actively helping special interest groups looting government money
The last decade in states like California and cities like SF and LA its been straight looting of the public purse by these people while the nacro gangs have had free reign. Think PRI run states in Mexico and thats pretty much how it is in the Blue states.
I’ve been watching Chanel 1 RU since the end of 2021. Just like I did in the late 1980’s / early 1990’s. On the principal of getting your propaganda lies directly from the source. Not second hand. What they gleefully show on Channel 1 RU is as repellant as Der Strurmer. Its even worse over on Russia One. I have zero illusions that for the Russians its a war of annihilation against Ukraine. And the Ukrainian people. Thats what they keep saying. But that is no longer the US’s problem. It has bigger more important problems to deal with. The coming war with China.
Trump was elected by Americans to defend their interests. And keeping the status quo going in the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not longer in the best interest of America. For Americans. And as Europeans continue to treat the duly elected President with such utter contempt (as so many of them did treated Reagan back in the 1980’s) its FAFO time. By this stage no one in the US but the chattering classes in DC/NYC US give a flying four letter word about Europe and its self indulgent cultural suicide.
One other interesting fact gleaned from watching way too much Russian TV / reading Russian media.
Before 2022 the “Escalate to Deescalate” target for the Russians demonstration nuclear detonation was the ABM radar at Redzikowo, Poland. After last Septembers “revision” of Russian nuclear use doctrine it looks like “Escalate to Deescalate” is still very much alive but given the wording the new demonstration target will be in Western Europe. And from what is known of Russian targeting doctrine Holy Lock in Scotland would be at the very top of any Russian target list. For a dialed down 125kt high altitude (60k+ ft) air-burst at night. So no ground blast damage. No radioactive fall-out. Least flash blindness casualty risk. But the biggest political crisis in the UK of the modern era.
Something to look forward too.
Which would definitely have happened if Trump was not president. The public threat and very public warning of the potential targets. If not the actual detonation. The Russians are very close to a Germany in September 1918 situation. Every probably outcome is going to be terrible. At least for Europe.
What The Guardian was saying about Reagan, as he took office in 1981:
Change some names around, and this could have been written here, yesterday.
@bobby b
In the case of the BBC they were very anti-Reagan in their coverage even before he became president. The BBC coverage of Reagan’s Republican nomination campaign in 1976 was very negative and dismissive. According to the BBC Reagan was a stupid illiterate actor who just a puppet of sinister Republican forces. By the time 1980 rolled around the only reason why the BBC was not totally a cheerleader for the Carter was because they found his Born Again Christianity faintly repugnant. But I remember the coverage the day after the election in 1980 was positively funerial on both BBC TV and Radio 4 news. And after the landslide in 1984 barely concealed anger.
So nothing new
Y’all will have to excuse my serial commenting here on this post, but, as I contemplate RR looking down presumably in horror as DJT does DJT things, I get riled.
I remember 1981. I remember the reaction of Europe to RR. What was this bumpkin cowboy-actor who waved American flags thinking, presuming to run the entire USA, and meddle in grown-up affairs in Europe? What were we, the American voters, doing when we selected such a rah-rah rube? Madness.
I remember the jokes of the sophisticates of Europe about his naivete, his lack of knowledge, his lack of intelligence. How could we send him over to Europe to attempt to converse with the leading adults of the world? We weren’t a serious country, which, given our wealth and power, was a dangerous situation.
I think we do best when we select people who are deemed unsuitable for the role. When we pick the right people, we just keep ratcheting leftward. Disrupters aren’t pretty. And I bet Ukraine comes out of this better than they would have if we had a Bush or an Obama or a Romney in charge.
(ETA: And to tfourier, amen to all you said above.)
They were very anti-Thatcher too, but she won three successive general elections. So who gives a fuck what the BBC said?
A very relevant tweet (h/t Instapundit). Very much my way of thinking, only deeper.
An extract:
Tale of two (recent) Guardian headlines
How it started
7 February 2025:”Trump’s foreign aid cuts could be ‘big strategic mistake’, says Lammy”
How it’s going:
25 February 2025: ”This is a hard choice. We believe in foreign aid – but we have to make cuts. We must keep the UK safe” – David Lammy
The leading candidate in the Romanian Presidential Election – the person who won the first round last year (the state responded by cancelling the election) and is in the lead in the polls in this new Presidential Election, has been detained. The candidate may be no good – but that should be for the voters to decide.
United States Vice President J.D. Vance begged European NATO partner nations, such as Romania (which is next to Ukraine), to stop behaving like this – but they have chosen to ignore his warnings.
We shall have to see how things develop – what actually happens.
> They were very anti-Thatcher too, but she won three successive general elections.
But no matter how much you may hate the BBC (and I do) they still set the narrative for most of the UK population whose only source of “news” is the MSM. And this was as true in the 1980’s as it is now.
Thatcher kept winning because people in the UK at the time lived what was actually happening everyday and they could see with their own eyes just how wrong so much of the BBC anti-Thatcher vitriol (especially after 1983) was. So they lied to pollsters (remember the 1992 Election polls fiasco) and voted for what was best for Britain. But ask most UK people today of that generation their opinion of Reagan and it will be little different from the vicious parodies you saw on Spitting Image at the time. They are on youtube. Unrelentingly nasty.
I spent the first Reagan administration in the UK / Europe. I spent the second Reagan administration in the US. And even though already a very skeptical media watcher and had grown up around Americans (mostly from Texas) I was genuinely shocked at just how mendacious and often outright partisan fabrications UK/European media coverage of the US was. Totally divorced from the reality of daily life in the US at the time. About as objective and true as (Soviet) Radio Moscow in the early 1980’s
Something that has not changed. I’d put the accuracy of current BBC News coverage of US politics about as objective as what you would see at the moment on Vremya or Great Game (Информационный канал) on Channel 1 RU. Despite what the MSM says they are not happy campers on Russian state TV. They really wanted another very weak / utterly incompetent Democratic administration. So they are somber and more than a little worried.
I appreciate the range of perspectives here. I’d like to throw in something else to think about. Ukraine had the same demographic challenges as pretty much every former Soviet bloc country going into this war. Since then something like 20% of the population fled and has been living as refugees for years. A big chunk of the military age male population is dead. Infrastructure has been systematically targeted by the Russians and is a mess, as is most of the manufacturing base. Some fraction of the refugee population will never return. I don’t know what that number is, but given that Ukraine was poorer even before the war than where they are now I would expect that number to be considerable. All of these issues will only get worse as the war continues, even if the Ukrainian military can remain effective. At some point there simply won’t be the people to repopulate the territory Russia is occupying even if they were to recover it.
One of the interesting things about wars of national survival is that the worst casualties tend to pile up after the victor has acquired a decisive advantage and has moved on to forcing a surrender. So I don’t doubt that, if given the resources, the Ukrainians will fight to the (metaphorical) last man. But one of the requirements of a just war is that there be some chance of success (Just War, being a Christian concept, does not justify suicide). At some point (if we aren’t there already after 3 years) Ukraine will be irreparably damaged and all of this sacrifice will have been in vain even if the Russians turn around and go home.
The last two years of this war have demonstrated quite clearly that the Ukrainians can’t force the Russians out. They don’t have the manpower left, and push come the shove the Russians can sustain a higher level of material losses. The Ukrainians have been amazingly successful using drones to leverage their very limited manpower and mount an effective defense, but they haven’t been able to use that offensively. I don’t think there is anything left to give the Ukrainians (that they could effectively use) that would change this, so short of actual NATO intervention this war will only end when the Russians stop fighting and they continue to show no signs at all of doing so. So how, exactly, are the Ukrainians going to force the Russians to concede much of anything beyond a status quo armistice and exchange of prisoners? And how much more can they afford to sacrifice in what appears to be a vain attempt to do so?
No, if the Russians did that, it was not in vain.
No again, at some point the Russian economy collapses, ending their ability to prosecute the war offensively. A collapse of the Ukrainian economy does not have the same effect if outside aid (even without the USA) is maintained.
If it was actually true in the 1980s, Thatcher would not have won three times. If I was true now, Reform would not be well on the way to displacing the Tories as the most meaningful long term second party.
@tfourier do people in Britain really care what the BBC says? I don’t live there but what I can say for sure is that I have not watched broadcast television in at least ten years, maybe twenty. I remember the days when something like EastEnders was on at 6pm so you had to be in front of the telly at 6pm. But I definitely haven’t done that for twenty years.
I think perhaps older people sometimes get their news from broadcast TV, but less and less and less. Most people get their news from Youtube or facebook. And I don’t see the BBC having any sense of dominance there.
But maybe it is different in Britain.
As to Thatcher, although you will not find a bigger fan of her than me, she was really very lucky in her electoral wins. 1979 because of the utter disaster of the “anything is better than the winter of discontent”, 1983 because of the Argies (were it not for the Falklands I think she would have got creamed in that election) and 1987 because Kinnock was a total dick and because of the mess of the “alternative” of the SDP that split the anti tory vote. So really a series of black sheep that helped her win and rescue Britain.
Paul Marks:
Joyce was in fact born in the United States in 1906, where his Irish immigrant parents had married. They returned to Ireland three years later, and he grew up there. They were Unionist Protestants, whose house was burned down by Irish rebels, so they moved to Britain. Joyce had even served with the “Black-and-Tans” as a teenage auxiliary. He mentioned this when he applied to a British military cadet program. He professed his “loyalty to the Crown” and his willingness to “draw the sword” for Britain.
However, his father had been a naturalized American (though he concealed it) and Joyce was therefore American as well. This could immunize him against the charge of treason.
But even as a resident alien, he had accepted the protection of the Crown and been considered British for thirty years. He took his British passport with him to Germany. As such he owed allegiance to the Crown, and by adhering to an enemy in time of war committed treason.
We now know what the charges are against the leading candidate in the Romanian election (Romania is next to Ukraine).
As well as vague paperwork “offenses” he is charged with spreading “Fascist, Xenophobe and Racist ideas” – “ideas” – in short he is charged with THOUGHT CRIME.
The situation is now clear – whatever you think of this candidate, and perhaps he is a total waste-of-space, if you are in support of democracy and liberty you must condemn this regime. And you must condemn those international forces that back this regime.
If you do not condemn this regime then do not talk about democracy or liberty in relation to the Ukraine or anywhere else.
This is unfair to Perry, but when I read that, I was a bit taken aback, because I could not help but hear echoes of this saying:
“Many of you will die, but that is a price I’m willing to pay.”
The Ukrainians don’t have a choice… or do they? They could have given up their sovereignty and knuckled under the Moscow autocrats. They chose to resist, something I hope all of us could do if the piper ever comes calling for us, instead of cutting and running.
And the bloody price they had paid… the developed world may owe them a massive debt after all is said and done, but it’s hard to convince the average american taxpayer of that, because the scale of the geopolitical game is simply too hard to comprehend. But if somebody can negotiate an out for Ukraine on suitable terms, they really should consider it carefully.
Trump’s moves have often panned out, so let’s wait and see if he can pull a rabbit out of his hat again. I read that he’s trying to convince Putin that making money together is better than getting people killed. Maybe that’s not quite a just outcome, but if it staves off the deaths of people, maybe it’s for the best. Provided, of course, Russia’s ambitions are curbed.
It’d even better if oil prices can come down – China can’t subsidise Russia forever; it’d be a double whammy against Russia and China by forcing Russia into greater debt and China using their long hoarded warchest surplus, and China’s economy isn’t doing so hot either.
The 2020 US Pres election and COVID really messed up the world, and it’ll be decades before the ramifications shake out.
By the way – if anyone trots out the “independence of the judiciary” line….
We know from Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom that the “independence of the judiciary” means the tyranny of unelected “Woke” (Critical Theory) judges – it is not different in Romania or the Ukraine.
I do not often agree with the late socialist Tony Benn – but he was right in saying that the test for a democracy is “how do we get rid of you?” – if the people have no straight forward way of getting rid of someone who has power over them, then they live under tyranny.
The unelected must, in the end, obey the elected – and the elected must submit themselves to the judgement of the people at regular times, not make excuses about why elections can not be held. And elections must be free and fair – with media on both sides (not all on one side) and with proper I.D. checks before voting, and the votes (paper ballots) counted in public.
As for judges or other officials excluding candidates as “Thought Criminals” because they have the “wrong” opinions.
Judges, or other officials, who try to do that should themselves be sent to prison.
And if there is no peaceful way to restore both democracy and Freedom of Speech – then the people have every right to take up arms to overthrow such a regime – including the judges.
This is true in Russia – where the government controls the media, elections are rigged, and the judges are systematically biased. But it is also true in all other countries.
In Austria three establishment (sorry “centrist”) political parties have done a deal to keep the “far right” Freedom Party entirely out of government – in spite of the Freedom Party winning the general election and being in a coalition government only a few years ago.
And if the Freedom Party had won 51% of the vote (incredibly difficult with the education system, the media, the church, and every other institution against them) some other trick would have been pulled – for example they might have been banned as “anti democratic” – the Euro elite do not see the irony of banning people, and urinating on the votes of the electorate, in the name of democracy.
The establishment media (such as Mr Wolf in the Financial Times) are saying “America is the enemy” – “America is the enemy” because of two things, it allows Freedom of Speech, and it allows the will of the people that Donald J. Trump be President and J.D. Vance be Vice President to be respected.
In short someone is an “enemy” of the international establishment if they believe in two things – freedom (Freedom of Speech and so on) and democracy – real democracy, the right of people not just to vote, but for this voting to CHANGE POLICY.
Very well then – I am proud to say that I am an “enemy” as well, as I believe in both of these things.
In Austria three establishment (sorry “centrist”) political parties have done a deal to keep the “far right” Freedom Party entirely out of government – in spite of the Freedom Party winning the general election and being in a coalition government only a few years ago.
And if the Freedom Party had won 51% of the vote (incredibly difficult with the education system, the media, the church, and every other institution against them) some other trick would have been pulled – for example they might have been banned as “anti democratic” – the Euro elite do not see the irony of banning people, and urinating on the votes of the electorate, in the name of democracy.
The establishment media (such as Mr Wolf in the Financial Times) are saying “America is the enemy” – “America is the enemy” because of two things, it allows Freedom of Speech, and it allows the will of the people that Donald J. Trump be President and J.D. Vance be Vice President to be respected.
In short someone is an “enemy” of the international establishment if they believe in two things – freedom (Freedom of Speech and so on) and democracy – real democracy, the right of people not just to vote, but for this voting to CHANGE POLICY.
Very well then – I am proud to say that I am an “enemy” as well, as I believe in both of these things.
It was a lovely press conference today. I only wish Trump had demanded Ukraine repay our generous loans quickly and with interest.
I’m not sure why the British and Europeans have such a problem with American taxpayer money being spent on Americans instead of on Ukrainians. The pearl clutching became tiresome long ago and I hope we all learned today after the press conference that the globalist-controlled Reagan is not compatible with the values of America First.
Until there is some semblance of justice, including mass imprisonment, for the 2020 election theft in which the globalists and deep state stole victory from Trump, I do not want to hear a peep from anyone about “values” or “democracy”. Also the UK imprisons its own citizens for social media posts at far higher per capita rates than Russia does.
I think Zelensky should be an actual hero and fight the Russians without any American money or American weaponry or American intelligence or any American support whatsoever. Zelensky can certainly get generous help from Germany, France, and the UK all of which are much wealthier than Russia. The Ukraine-Russia war is a concern for Europe, not for America.
America First
Sure thing, Shlomo, you are going to get your wish. I agree the Ukraine-Russia war is a concern for Europe. As USA no longer wishes to be the uncontested global leader of “the west”, Europe needs to step up on this and many other issues as well as a matter of the utmost urgency. Leave the US to focus on its coming war with China, that is none of Europe’s business.
I don’t understand why Trump and Zelenskyy are bickering when they should be united against the common enemy: the Germans.
Added in proof: … and the Democrats.