Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, May 17, 2022

Tucker Carlson invoked the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., on his Fox News show Monday night while issuing a derisive nickname for Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, who recently voted in favor of a $40 billion aid package from the U.S. to Ukraine.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Is there a GOP bill to help Americans out with $40B of Baby Formula, or is this just posturing and Republican voters don't even know they're supposed to connect the dots?

Sadly, it's become a rhetorical question.

#1 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-17 05:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Forty billion dollars is a -------- of cash. It could save thousands of lives here by providing healthcare and nutritional support.

Instead it goes to fund a war and pay for lethal arms for Nazis.

Disgusting.

#2 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2022-05-17 05:57 PM | Reply

Still can't prove Ukraine is run by Nazis, eh?

You must be so sad and desperate.

No wonder you're here everyday, incessantly spreading lies.

You have no other emotional outlet. It would be fascinating to investigate if it wasn't so fnkcing sad.

You're still, after all this time, massively unconvincing. But here you are, with the same baseless shtick acting as though your changing minds.

No wonder people think you're a paid Russian shill. There's nothing else you offer that is convincing other than that.

Why do you bother with this? Are you a masochist or something?

#3 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-05-17 06:30 PM | Reply

The truth is it's own reward. If others choose to live in delusion, that is not my concern until it affects me directly. I'm like a candle in the dark. If the the light hurts your eyes,don't look directly at it.

The Truth will set you Free.

#4 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2022-05-17 06:52 PM | Reply

"The truth is it's own reward."

Did Russia invade Ukraine?

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-17 06:54 PM | Reply

Did the western alliance foment a Pro Western coup in the Ukraine and cause civil war that killed thousands of people? Were Russian speakers persecuted by Ukrainian militias?

Did the Crimea legitimately vote to leave the Ukraine and rejoin Russia?

#6 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2022-05-17 08:49 PM | Reply

Did I repeat every talkingpoint spurted down my throat by my Moscow Midget idol?
#6 | Posted by PootyFluffer

#7 | Posted by censored at 2022-05-17 09:14 PM | Reply

"Instead it goes to fund a war and pay for lethal arms for Nazis."

EFFETE MAKES THE MOST OBSCENE POSY HERE EVER. lIAR PROVEE YOC LIAR.UR LIE, PROVE THERE ARE nazis RUNNING uKRAINE.bUT YOU CAN'T YOU PATHETIC LIAR.

#8 | Posted by danni at 2022-05-17 10:00 PM | Reply

EFFETE is the most obscene
& the most DISHONEst & PATHEtIC PERSON WHO EVER POSTED HERE.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2022-05-17 10:06 PM | Reply

EFFETE is a Putin fan, a russian sympathazizer, asick person.
is

#10 | Posted by danni at 2022-05-17 10:08 PM | Reply

EFFETEPOSER

Nothing you say matters any more. You've already been indicted and found guilty on this site. You've earned your just deserts. You're a loser. Live with it.

#11 | Posted by Twinpac at 2022-05-17 10:12 PM | Reply

Nothing you say matters any more.

There was a point when it did?

#12 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-05-17 10:28 PM | Reply

#2

" Instead it goes to fund a war and pay for lethal arms for Nazis.

Disgusting."

Nazis? Get a grip. That's as idiotic as speaks saying everybody to the right of Mao is a fascist.

#13 | Posted by willowby at 2022-05-17 10:33 PM | Reply

That's rich coming from Bowtie McCuck.

#14 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-05-17 10:55 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Effete is right. You dogs are getting wagged. "#Ukraine" is like "Remember the Maine!" We are in a $54B (and counting) proxy war because the American people have been whipped into a frenzy by yellow journalists. Supposing the US succeeds in pushing back the Russians, what factions do you think will retain power in Ukraine after the smoke clears? Will it be incorruptible democratic peaceniks or newly empowered and freshly equipped paramilitary units that already waged eight years of ultranationalist war on their own ethnic-Russian civilians in eastern Ukraine? Look to recent US exercises in nation-building as a guide to how this might go down.

#15 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-17 11:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Oh good. Another one.

#16 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-05-17 11:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Pete Davison ears must have perked up.

#17 | Posted by memyselfini at 2022-05-18 12:00 AM | Reply

- Will it be incorruptible democratic peaceniks or newly empowered and freshly equipped paramilitary units

Extremists always think in... extremes. It will be people who successfully defended their fledgling freedoms, learned their lesson that they shouldn't be like Russia, and who might just as easily be more inclined to forego cronyism for democracy.

Funny part is that the Russian people now also have the choice to stand up and do the same.

EffetePutin hasn't been right about anything for years here, isn't right to propagate Putin's Nazi Lies, and no amount of other "Leftier than thou!" supposed libs will change that.

Some of us were protesting in the streets to get the US out of Vietnam, others of us here type about how much more pure a Leftist they are for having spent years typing insipid self-serving platitudes from their Mom's basement.

Attention trolls will troll.

#18 | Posted by Corky at 2022-05-18 12:09 AM | Reply

Attention trolls will troll."

Acontinue telling the truth> nd truthtellers like Corky will continu teelling the truth. And we love them ffor that. There is no one on tjis site I love more than Cotky. And the music he brings here isn't the only reason I love him but it is an important part of it. Corky, keep those tunes coming. I love the music you bring to my life.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2022-05-18 12:33 AM | Reply

Well, "Eye Patch McCain" is funny.

#20 | Posted by dibblda at 2022-05-18 01:09 AM | Reply

"Oh good. Another one."

#16 | POSTED BY REDIAL

Effeteposer changed his handle to Fasterdisaster.

The last pitiful resort of a loser.

#21 | Posted by Twinpac at 2022-05-18 05:40 AM | Reply

#2 | POSTED BY EFFETEPOSER

We're fighting you in Ukraine so we don't have to fight you here.

#22 | Posted by Zed at 2022-05-18 07:48 AM | Reply

#21, More than one person holds a different opinion than you. Those who have for years closely followed the developments in Ukraine appreciate that the MSM narrative that has influenced mainstream American public opinion about the war is extremely biased. On the other hand, Johnny-come-latelys regurgitate what they have been told since the beginning of 22.

#23 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-18 07:56 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#4 " I'm like a candle in the dark"

Right. Like a broken bulb in an electrical socket. Or a broken match. Same problem: No illumination.

#24 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2022-05-18 08:03 AM | Reply

Well, "Eye Patch McCain" is funny.

#20 | Posted by dibblda at 2022-05-18 01:09 AM | Reply | Flag

A --------- like Tucker mocking the war injury of a NAVY Seal is pretty sad.

Tucker would wet himself halfway through the first day of basic training.

Effeteposer changed his handle to Fasterdisaster.

Yup.

#25 | Posted by Nixon at 2022-05-18 08:07 AM | Reply

#15
How's your Russian revanchism going?

#26 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2022-05-18 08:21 AM | Reply

So here's a professional (at least in title) of a prime time news show (at least in title) that resorts to nicknames because he doesn't agree.

Remind you of any other prominent person we know?

Crenshaw would mop the floor with Carlson............

#27 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-05-18 09:10 AM | Reply

"Those who have for years closely followed the developments in Ukraine appreciate that the MSM narrative that has influenced mainstream American public opinion about the war is extremely biased."

It's definitely biased against the anti-Western values aggressor, and towards the considerably more open to Western values defender.

One might even say it's biased against the poor.

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-18 10:08 AM | Reply

Carlson needs to have his dainty little lights punched out. What a traitorous puke.

#29 | Posted by Yodagirl at 2022-05-18 10:37 AM | Reply

A couple of thoughts about the larger picture beyond the immediate do-we-or-don't-we-continue-aiding-Ukraine question.

Russia is a hostile rival to the U.S. Probably the foremost hostile rival to the U.S. You can argue China is a greater economic rival, but we also maintain close economic ties to China. In 2020 US-China trade was over $435 Billion. US-Russia trade about $36 Billion. China-Russia trade about $147 Billion, a third of China's trade with the U.S.

Supporting Ukraine weakens Russia. Want to call it a proxy war? OK. Russia is expending money, people, resources, internal political control, and international goodwill by continuing the war. Their expense is far more than ours, and even more so when you factor it as a percentage of GNP. With the current aid package, we'll be up to about $54 Billion. Which is less than .25% of our GDP. Russia has spent an estimated $73 Billion already, not counting their losses. The Moskva alone was worth $750 million. And we're not even calculating the cost of the sanctions. Russia's GDP is 7% of the US. That makes what they've already spent on the war almost 5% of their GDP. At at 900 million per day to sustain current efforts, Russia will continue spending .4% of their GDP every week, again not counting the expense of lost equipment. And what is the loss of 10k-15k people worth? Think back to the nuclear arms race during the Reagan years which bankrupted and led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Think further to the stilling effect of Russia's war of choice, and the resulting international response, upon China's interest in Taiwan. Think even beyond that to the perception of other Asian nations to China's continued trade with Russia, refusal to condemn Russia's invasion, and condemnation of the West's assistance to Ukraine. Look back to the US pulling out of the TPP, resulting in greater Chinese influence and erosion of trust toward the US in the region, and how the current situation can help us win both influence and trust back.

In short, there's a hell of lot more at stake for the US on the world stage than the simplistic view of how much money we're sending to Ukraine.

foreignpolicy.com
www.statista.com
www.forbes.com
www.statista.com
www.newsweek.com
thediplomat.com

#30 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-05-18 11:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#30, that view rests on the assumption that Russia is a hostile regime and ignores the US role in creating the perceived enemy through NATO expansion. NATO has become a self-fulfilling prophecy in this regard. (Cue: Russiagate arguments as proof of hostility.) Implicit in this view is the belief that geopolitics is a zero-sum game where the US is the global hegemon. However, the post-Soviet, US-led moment in time is slipping away. As you rightly observe, the attempt to maintain dominance is what the US investment in Ukraine is about: doubling-down on that worldview. John Mearsheimer calls it the great liberal delusion.

#31 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-18 12:13 PM | Reply

"#30, that view rests on the assumption that Russia is a hostile regime"

Yeah.

That's about as risky an assumption as water being wet, or the sun rising in the east.

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-18 12:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"that view rests on the assumption that Russia is a hostile regime"

Are you saying Russia is NOT a hostile regime?

NATO has never attacked anyone first.

NATO is clearly a defensive organization.

And Russia has proven it is hostile by attacking Ukraine killing thousands of innocents and creating a humanitarian disaster. And this isn't the first time.

What more proof do you need? How many more innocent civilians need to die this time to convince you?

#33 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-05-18 12:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That's rich coming from Bowtie McCuck.

#14 | POSTED BY LEGALLYYOURDEAD

I flagged that funny not in a passive-aggressive funny, but because I like your new nickname for The Tuckster. Whereas I think of a "tucker" as someone who uses this:www.amazon.com

#34 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-05-18 12:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#31 | POSTED BY FASTERDISASTER

Yes, I am assuming Russia is a hostile regime. Russia is at least as hostile toward us today as they ever have been, including back to the old USSR.

NATO is a defensive treaty organization. Member countries are not required by the treaty to join in an attack instigated by another member. Other countries joining NATO should be a signal to Russia that those countries view Russia as an aggressor, not that those countries intend aggression toward Russia. If Russia (Putin) is using the growth of NATO as provocation it (he) is only further signaling paranoia and iirrational decision making.

I don't agree that geopolitics is a zero sum game. In 30, I attempted to explain how, within the framework of their respective economies, both the U.S. and Russia are expending money and materiel. Both countries are losing. For it to be a zero sum game, one player would have to be gaining. I don't think anyone is gaining in this ongoing conflict. The US is just losing less than Russia. The long run gain has potential, but many future factors can affect that.

I don't believe the US is the global hegemon any more. Certainly not to the degree we one were. We may exert that influence in North America, possibly in South America. We have lost influence in the Middle East. The EU's internal influence is greater than our external influence in Europe. And China has greater Asian influence than we do.

#35 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-05-18 12:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#33, I meant hostile to the US. To conflate Russia's hostility toward Ukraine with its hostility toward the US is the issue with which I take umbrage. NATO is just an ever expanding defensive organization, eh? Well, you know what they say: the best defense is a good offense.

#36 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-18 12:56 PM | Reply

#15 | POSTED BY FASTERDISASTER

Da, comrade! Hail to needed reinforcements to proclaim Soviet Russia's great victory in Ukraine!

#37 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-05-18 01:03 PM | Reply

#34 | POSTED BY EL_BUSCADOR

Thanks!

#38 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-05-18 01:04 PM | Reply

NATO attacked Serbia. NATO dismembered Serbia. NATO bombed civilians. NATO installed the KLA, a drug gang just as murdereous as the Serbs were.

NATO helped destroy Libya. Defensive only? In your fevered imaginings. NATO is a tripwire for war.

#39 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2022-05-18 01:48 PM | Reply

NATO helped destroy Libya. Defensive only? In your fevered imaginings. NATO is a tripwire for war.

#39 | Posted by Effeteposer

Libyans were being slaughtered by a tyrant and begged NATO for assistance.

Just like ukranians.

NATO is designed to be a tripwire for war. That's why no one has ever invaded a NATO country. No matter how bad putin wants to.

#40 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-05-18 02:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#23 | Posted by FasterDisaster

Troll-o-lo-lo speak. I am watching things from the Ukraine Government, Russian Government, US Govt/NATO/EU, MSM, Social Media, Bellingcat and some non-European outlets.

It is despicable first that Putin started this. It is horrific what his troops and mercenaries are doing. Even the people of Luhansk and Donetsk are horrified. I have seen photos I simply will never be unable to un-see. I can't imagine actually living it. Russia is not only an aggressor but too many of the troops and without question officers are purely sadistic and evil. I knew what the Wagner Mercenaries and Chechens were but it goes well beyond them.

All the BS about NATO aside. NATO was never going to attack Russia. The cold war is still embedded in Putin's mind - dictators will dictate. Ukraine had no path to NATO as long as Luhansk, Donetsk and Crimea's fates were unresolved. Period. That was not going to change.

Ukraine elected Zelensky with no need for a run off election. He earned the position with over 73% of the vote in an election. The International Election Observer Mission (IEOM) released a preliminary assessment that noted some problems but termed the election competitive, reported that candidates campaigned freely, and said that the electorate had a broad choice. This election and the 3 previous all earned free, fair, and competitive assessments. Another indicator of a free and fair election.

Zelensky is ANTI-CORRUPTION.
Zelensky is NOT an OLIGARCH.
Zelensky is a JEW.
Zelensky has the COURAGE to do what is RIGHT.

Does that tell something about the Ukrainian people and what they want? They are smarter on average than a large percentage of Americans.

#41 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2022-05-18 04:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#39 | Posted by Effeteposer

You never fail to amaze. Serbia? Serbia was the aggressor in an exceptionally bloody conflict. Serbian atrocities? Look up Siege of Sarajevo among others. Yes members of the KLA also committed atrocities - this is documented. Unfortunately this happens in wars and why war should be avoided in general. What was the scale of atrocities? Serb atrocities to KLA? 10:1? 20:1?

As for NATO - this was a UNITED NATIONS Peacekeeping mission that NATO took on. The UN security console voted for several resolutions around it. That console included Russia and China. Just sayin... Certainly NATO pushed for it. It was not a war of aggression by NATO it was a peacekeeping mission that brought a halt to Serb barbarism. So the Russians - always Serbia's buddies - didn't bother to veto any of the resolutions. That kind of says something on its own.

#42 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2022-05-18 04:46 PM | Reply

31: everything you just said is so absurd, so totally stupid, it's hard to know where to begin. This never had anything to do with NATO or "expansion." Even of it were, countries go what's best for themselves and their own internal politics is no excuse for Putin to invade ... or provide a way for you to rationalize away his invasion and murderous actions.

2: Putin has never invaded Estonia. A border country That is an actual member of NATO. Not flirted with it. Actually a member. Why do you suppose that Is? I'll give you a hint. It's because it has nothing to do with NATO, Ava editing to do with natural resources. Ukraine is one of the most fertile lands in Europe. He needs it to feed his people cheaper than he can right now by having to trade for food.

The sad thing is you've swallowed so much right wing propaganda you Skip the truth and only see the left wing propaganda.

#43 | Posted by ABH at 2022-05-18 05:13 PM | Reply

"I meant hostile to the US."

Hostile to everyone with anything worth stealing.

Exhibit A: Conti.

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-18 05:22 PM | Reply

"Did the western alliance foment a Pro Western coup in the Ukraine and cause civil war that killed thousands of people? Were Russian speakers persecuted by Ukrainian militias?
Did the Crimea legitimately vote to leave the Ukraine and rejoin Russia?"

No, No
snd No.

None of the claims youmade are true.....LIAR!

#45 | Posted by danni at 2022-05-18 05:34 PM | Reply

When Effette 'talks' through his posts
here now, all I hear is, "blah, blah, blickety,
blah, blah, blah..." more of the same
pro-russian schpeel ad nausium...

#46 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-05-18 09:21 PM | Reply

El Buscador, I appreciate your thoughtful responses and links. I'm adding this note at the beginning of what I already wrote below because I don't have time to respond to you.

Fun fact: Did you know that the word Ukraine means "borderland" in Russian?

There are so many experts here who should be on the Disinformation Governance Board to curate the truth. It's hard to argue with such rigorous truth-seeking as illuminated in #45. Unless of course one were to try to understand The Other, then a counter argument could be found. But thanks to the DGB here, we may all be spared the burden of thought.

#43, I have trouble believing this is a resource war. That is a common theory that makes little sense given Russia's ample resources and absence of hunger. That it is a land grab for a strategic land bridge with naval access to the Black Sea is an argument I buy, but not a land grab for wheat or gas.

To address another of your points, "What's best for themselves" might have been to not enshrine the pursuit of NATO membership into the Ukrainian constitution in 2019. In the Western Hemisphere, the US allows states the right to self determination only to the extent that it violates the Monroe Doctrine. Soviet missiles in Cuba, for example, represented a foreign power at the US doorstep, which was unacceptable to Kennedy. Yet Kennedy avoided war by de-escalating. He secretly negotiated to remove US missiles from the Russian border in Turkey in exchange for Soviets removing their missiles from Cuba.

Not so NATO in Ukraine. NATO doubled-down. Under Trump and then even more so under Biden, NATO poured in weapons to Ukraine despite more than a decade of warnings from Moscow and a war in Georgia to prove they meant business about "no NATO." The Ukraine border nearly completes a military ring around Russia. And that long Ukraine border represents a significant proportion of the ring. A coordinated military ring around Russia would give those that control it the power to dictate policy, controlling land and sea trade and military routes. NATO has proven they don't want to let Russia in their club, a club intended to counter Soviet aggression (a self-fulfilling prophecy). So Russia has to believe they are the enemy; and the enemy is at the gate. Ukraine is not the enemy, Putin reckons, the US-led NATO coalition is.

I think Putin is enforcing his own sort of Monroe Doctrine. Let's call it the Moscow Doctrine. Is it a just war? Let the ethicists decide. Is it justifiable from a Russian preemptive national defense point of view? I can see it. Was it predictable? Yes. Hard to believe but not without warning. Is it what's best for Ukraine? Absolutely not.

#41, I agree war is horrible. (Who doesn't?) If we spent more time dwelling on the horrors of war, maybe there would be less of it. Ukraine was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Putin did not need the Ukrainians to sign the paperwork to see the growing NATO force depositing weapons near his border. Putin knew that prior to Zelenski, back in 2014, the US backed a regime change to remove another legitimately elected leader in Ukraine, Yanukovych, and install one that would pursue pro-NATO anti-Russia policies. The US-backed anti-Russia regime change next door must've been pretty alarming for ol' Cold War Putin, especially after NATO had denied his petition for membership. Indeed the first act of the new government was to outlaw Russian language. Russia responded to these events by annexing Crimea. Tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalated from there. Over the next eight years 17,000 eastern Ukrainians, including civilians men, women and children died at the hands of the Ukrainian military and paramilitary, a large number of whom were known Nazi ultranationalists getting a little of the ol' ultraviolence.

#47 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-19 01:23 AM | Reply

El Buscador, I appreciate your thoughtful responses and links. I'm adding this note at the beginning of what I already wrote below because I don't have time to respond to you.

Fun fact: Did you know that the word Ukraine means "borderland" in Russian?

There are so many experts here who should be on the Disinformation Governance Board to curate the truth. It's hard to argue with such rigorous truth-seeking as illuminated in #45. Unless of course one were to try to understand The Other, then a counter argument could be found. But thanks to the DGB here, we may all be spared the burden of thought.

#43, I have trouble believing this is a resource war. That is a common theory that makes little sense given Russia's ample resources and absence of hunger. That it is a land grab for a strategic land bridge with naval access to the Black Sea is an argument I buy, but not a land grab for wheat or gas.

To address another of your points, "What's best for themselves" might have been to not enshrine the pursuit of NATO membership into the Ukrainian constitution in 2019. In the Western Hemisphere, the US allows states the right to self determination only to the extent that it violates the Monroe Doctrine. Soviet missiles in Cuba, for example, represented a foreign power at the US doorstep, which was unacceptable to Kennedy. Yet Kennedy avoided war by de-escalating. He secretly negotiated to remove US missiles from the Russian border in Turkey in exchange for Soviets removing their missiles from Cuba.

Not so NATO in Ukraine. NATO doubled-down. Under Trump and then even more so under Biden, NATO poured in weapons to Ukraine despite more than a decade of warnings from Moscow and a war in Georgia to prove they meant business about "no NATO." The Ukraine border nearly completes a military ring around Russia. And that long Ukraine border represents a significant proportion of the ring. A coordinated military ring around Russia would give those that control it the power to dictate policy, controlling land and sea trade and military routes. NATO has proven they don't want to let Russia in their club, a club intended to counter Soviet aggression (a self-fulfilling prophecy). So Russia has to believe they are the enemy; and the enemy is at the gate. Ukraine is not the enemy, Putin reckons, the US-led NATO coalition is.

I think Putin is enforcing his own sort of Monroe Doctrine. Let's call it the Moscow Doctrine. Is it a just war? Let the ethicists decide. Is it justifiable from a Russian preemptive national defense point of view? I can see it. Was it predictable? Yes. Hard to believe but not without warning. Is it what's best for Ukraine? Absolutely not.

#41, I agree war is horrible. (Who doesn't?) If we spent more time dwelling on the horrors of war, maybe there would be less of it. Ukraine was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Putin did not need the Ukrainians to sign the paperwork to see the growing NATO force depositing weapons near his border. Putin knew that prior to Zelenski, back in 2014, the US backed a regime change to remove another legitimately elected leader in Ukraine, Yanukovych, and install one that would pursue pro-NATO anti-Russia policies. The US-backed anti-Russia regime change next door must've been pretty alarming for ol' Cold War Putin, especially after NATO had denied his petition for membership. Indeed the first act of the new government was to outlaw Russian language. Russia responded to these events by annexing Crimea. Tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalated from there. Over the next eight years 17,000 eastern Ukrainians, including civilians men, women and children died at the hands of the Ukrainian military and paramilitary, a large number of whom were known Nazi ultranationalists getting a little of the ol' ultraviolence.

#48 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-19 01:23 AM | Reply

"Did the western alliance foment a Pro Western coup in the Ukraine and cause civil war that killed thousands of people? Were Russian speakers persecuted by Ukrainian militias?
Did the Crimea legitimately vote to leave the Ukraine and rejoin Russia?"

fLAT OUT LIE

#49 | Posted by danni at 2022-05-19 03:55 AM | Reply

48: Russia does not have enough land to feed its own people staples. It relies on exporting natural gas and importing food. An expensive process. Of course we in this country import tons of food every day, but our economy is infinitely more diverse and can absorb it. If we had to, we could produce enough food to feed ourselves without importing ... it would mean going without some exotic folks but so be it. That's not true in Russia. Whether you believe it or not, Russia is a poor country. Their navy is basically rusted to the piers where they are moored beside they can't afford to repair and maintain them. Their military as you can see from the shellacking they are getting by Ukrainian grandmas, isn't much better than their navy. Taking Ukraine and accessing their vast farmland means their natural Gas can be sold at surplus not to be turned into food importation.

Accessing the Black Sea? Fine that has some value, but they have plenty of deep water access. The Black Sea May mage deployment easier, and distribution of their has easier, but they already have the infrastructure they need. This is a resurgence war

#50 | Posted by ABH at 2022-05-19 06:56 AM | Reply

McCain wishes he could pick stocks like Crenshaw. The guy is a truly a trading phenom and certainly 100% honest with no insider trading going on whatsoever. A total novice to top 5 stock returns in Congress.

#51 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2022-05-19 08:41 AM | Reply

#50 | POSTED BY ABH

You know, that was my first thought when this started ramping up last fall. Russia is a net importer of food. Ukraine is a rich food producer. My state does a lot of business building and shipping farm machinery and implements to Ukraine. Ukraine would also open up a lot of Black Sea ports for Russia. Looking at the region on the map, of Russia's western border countries, Ukraine has the furthest west-reaching land access for gas pipelines to Europe. Agriculturally and geographically, you can see why Russia would want to control Ukraine.

#52 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-05-19 09:16 AM | Reply

#48

Most of what you say makes perfect sense, but for one problem. The people of Ukraine. Had they been pro-Russian, or even ambivalent, Russia would control Ukraine right now. But the Ukrainians have fought the Russians to a standstill. They seem to hate Russia. They don't appear to want any part of Russia. Which means that NATO and the US are not part of the equation. NATO can't force Ukraine to become a member.

Effete makes similar arguments all the time, but they're invalid because they never take the people of Ukraine into account. It's always framed as a Russian vs. NATO thing, or the even dumber Russia vs. US thing.

The most determined support for UKR in this war has come from countries that were Russian puppets and want to make sure it never happens again.

#53 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-19 02:26 PM | Reply

#50, send us the stats on Russian hunger normalized against comparative stats for other major countries. You might be right, but that has never been my experience in visiting Russia.

#48, I would say the US-led NATO alliance has fought Russia. I stick by that. Without American support, this war would have been over by now. We (I say "we" because I am American, not a Russian troll) have actively discouraged peace talks when Zelenski said he would be willing to accept NATO-neutrality. We have already committed more funds to Ukraine than the entire military budget of Russia. And it didn't start after the Russian invasion. The arms were already pouring in beginning in 2017 and accelerating from there.

That, I believe, is why Putin struck when he did. He needed to make his move before Ukraine became too strong and a NATO member. Did he miscalculate? Yes, he faced more Western resistance than he thought he would after the non-response to Crimea and the blip in Georgia. Was there a better moment to make a move? Not by waiting. He saw that the West's gestures at a diplomatic solution would never lead to a compromise that would satisfy him, namely no NATO membership for Ukraine. Eventually Ukraine would become an official member. In the meantime, they would be a de facto member.

Given these factors, Putin saw opportunity to strike with a new PM in Germany, a politically vulnerable president facing an election in France, and Biden in the US, who could be anticipated to stick to the status quo. After all, Obama did not send weapons to Ukraine. Obama understood that Russia would view that as an existential threat and did not think it was worth the risk. Does the stiffer-than-expected resistance mean Putin's war will fail? Maybe. The readers of this blog certainly hope so. But it will be a cold winter in Germany without Russian gas. It will be an uphill battle for US politicians at the polls when Americans become drained by inflation. Many of the warmongers will be voted out. A faraway land will seem a lot less engaging after enough news cycles. After all, we don't have any boots on the ground "over there." But Russia is committed.

Ukraine is not a monolith. It is an ethnically fragmented country. The united, defiant Ukraine view doesn't pass the sniff test for a country that was embroiled in what amounts to a civil war for nearly a decade before the Russian invasion. You are right about the hate Russia thing. While many have a new and legitimate reason to hate Russia post-invasion, the Russia haters were already in power and at war with their own ethnically Russian population, which brings us back to my initial point: We are funding Nazis in Ukraine whether the mainstream media reports on it or not.

#54 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-19 11:18 PM | Reply

And #48, When you said, "Russia doesn't have enough land," it made me lol. Russia spans eleven time zones, has more arable land than all but two countries, and it's people constitute only 2% of global population.

#55 | Posted by FasterDisaster at 2022-05-19 11:35 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort