Russia brings the fight to ISIS in Syria!!!

#926
#926
No, Ras, I'm not projecting the Cold War on to contemporary Russia.

Perhaps if you didn't put people on "Ignore" so damn often, you'd actually be capable of reading their comments instead of pigeon-holing their actual claims.
 
#928
#928
volprof said:
I'm a little confused as to what exactly you're suggesting or what that has to do with this conversation, but, yes, I agree Russians are very patriotic people and are very admirable in that trait. Unfortunately for Russians, their leaders have historically channeled those energies and passions in unproductive directions.

But maybe you're right. Maybe Putin is the guy to finally lead them in that direction. After all, all that rational analysis I just gave really doesn't matter in the end; all that really matters is human emotion, and Russians, just like Americans, are very passionate and emotional people.
Click to expand...

Russians have been underestimated/ discredited too many times. They're still there....

It's no different today..
 
#929
#929
Pacer92 said:
Russians have been underestimated/ discredited too many times. They're still there....

It's no different today..
Click to expand...

Yes, and I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise.

The debate (or part of it at least) is about whether or not Putin's Russia offers a feasible and appealing alternative to the West.

I don't see that it does, because it's a negative (meaning defined by its opposition to the Western liberal order) values narrative, which offers no original, unique alternative. It simply casts criticism and doubt upon the West, mumbles something about multipolarity and state sovereignty (while not actually respecting either) in the process, and presents itself as some sort of new ideal and alternative. It says nothing about how the world should function as an increasingly integrated global economy or as increasingly pluralistic societies. Instead, it seems to ignore those realities altogether.

But, as I conceded in a previous post, that Putin's alternative is really no alternative at all makes no real difference because human beings are emotional animals in their primary state. All it takes to sell them something is to stir up their emotions, but that can only take you so far. Eventually real results, ones that demonstrate an improvement in all our lives, Russians and the rest of the world alike, will need to materialize.

You may not agree with it, but the US has and still does offer a much better solution to the question of "how best to improve my life" for more people around the globe than either Russia or China. That may change tomorrow, but, at the moment, it has not.
 
Last edited:
#930
#930
volprof said:
Yes, and I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise.

The debate (or part of it at least) is about whether or not Putin's Russia offers a feasible and appealing alternative to the West.

I don't see that it does, because it's a negative (meaning defined by its opposition to the Western liberal order) values narrative, which offers no original, unique alternative. It simply casts criticism and doubt upon the West, mumbles something about multipolarity and state sovereignty (while not actually respecting either) in the process, and presents itself as some sort of new ideal and alternative. It says nothing about how the world should function as an increasingly integrated global economy or as increasingly pluralistic societies. Instead, it seems to ignore those realities altogether.

But, as I conceded in a previous post, that Putin's alternative is really no alternative at all makes no real difference because human beings are emotional animals in their primary state. All it takes to sell them something is to stir up their emotions, but that can only take you so far. Eventually real results, ones that demonstrate an improvement in all our lives, Russians and the rest of the world alike, will need to materialize.

You may not agree with it, but the US has and still does offer a much better solution to the question of "how best to improve my life" for more people around the globe than either Russia or China. That may change tomorrow, but, at the moment, it has not.
Click to expand...

I don't think it compromising on either of our behalfs, because I really think you and I conjoin ideologically, albeit on different sides, I think it's in our premise....
 
#931
#931
Pacer92 said:
I don't think it compromising on either of our behalfs, because I really think you and I conjoin ideologically, albeit on different sides, I think it's in our premise....
Click to expand...

Your premise is that the world does not and should not require a hegemonic narrative? Is that correct?

If that is where you start, then yes, I fundamentally disagree. Given that the world system is essentially anarchy and chaos, I actually subscribe to hegemonic stability theory, and I think the US liberal order (at the moment, and that is something that could change, unfortunately) is the best model.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#932
#932
volprof said:
Your premise is that the world does not and should not require a hegemonic narrative? Is that correct?

If that is where you start, then yes, I fundamentally disagree. Given that the world system is essentially anarchy and chaos, I actually subscribe to hegemonic stability theory, and I think the US liberal order (at the moment, and that is something that could change, unfortunately) is the best model.
Click to expand...

Ok...I see that..

Is your answer THE answer? If so, why is it better that the alternative(Putin) ..
 
#933
#933
volprof said:
Yes, and I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise.

The debate (or part of it at least) is about whether or not Putin's Russia offers a feasible and appealing alternative to the West.

I don't see that it does, because it's a negative (meaning defined by its opposition to the Western liberal order) values narrative, which offers no original, unique alternative. It simply casts criticism and doubt upon the West, mumbles something about multipolarity and state sovereignty (while not actually respecting either) in the process, and presents itself as some sort of new ideal and alternative. It says nothing about how the world should function as an increasingly integrated global economy or as increasingly pluralistic societies. Instead, it seems to ignore those realities altogether.

But, as I conceded in a previous post, that Putin's alternative is really no alternative at all makes no real difference because human beings are emotional animals in their primary state. All it takes to sell them something is to stir up their emotions, but that can only take you so far. Eventually real results, ones that demonstrate an improvement in all our lives, Russians and the rest of the world alike, will need to materialize.

You may not agree with it, but the US has and still does offer a much better solution to the question of "how best to improve my life" for more people around the globe than either Russia or China. That may change tomorrow, but, at the moment, it has not.
Click to expand...

this.

one of your most well written posts prof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#936
#936
n_huffhines said:
fuuuuuuu**



At least 26 Syrian civilians killed in suspected US-led airstrike | World news | The Guardian
Click to expand...

If true, we need to take responsibility. Whether or not we admit our mistakes doesn't make much difference in that part of the world - all that matters there is that it was reported that the US possibly killed 26 civilians. Where it does matter, however, is for the rest of the world that is watching and judging US leadership.

Strong leaders step to the fore and admit their flaws, while demonstrating an ability to avoid them in the future (words match deeds); weak leaders pretend like they have no flaws and make no real effort to avoid them in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#937
#937
LouderVol said:
if I may interject, it seems at some point its personal preference.
Click to expand...

I'm typically not the kind of guy who uses "a billion people can't be wrong" narratives as proof. Populism and the opinions of the masses are often just (if not even more) as overbearing, unjust, and backwards as any government. But, statistics show time and again, that the world is much more satisfied with US leadership than any other alternatives. You would never guess this while navigating the Internet, as swamped as it is by loudmouth anti-Americanism, but, statistics show this is a relatively small minority.

At the end of the day, you're right. It's about a model of the world you find best, and not all will agree with the US liberal model. But most do, because they see demonstrable changes in their lives and not just the lip service offered by a Putin or a Xi, and that's all that matters moving forward.
 
#940
#940
volprof said:
I'm typically not the kind of guy who uses "a billion people can't be wrong" narratives as proof. Populism and the opinions of the masses are often just (if not even more) as overbearing, unjust, and backwards as any government. But, statistics show time and again, that the world is much more satisfied with US leadership than any other alternatives. You would never guess this while navigating the Internet, as swamped as it is by loudmouth anti-Americanism, but, statistics show this is a relatively small minority.

At the end of the day, you're right. It's about a model of the world you find best, and not all will agree with the US liberal model. But most do, because they see demonstrable changes in their lives and not just the lip service offered by a Putin or a Xi, and that's all that matters moving forward.
Click to expand...

I agree. in the past when a hegemony came to power it was tolerated as long as it worked, eventually came a crisis that upset it to the point where it didn't work and you saw a collapse. During most of the hegemony's the world went through periods of "golden age" not the least amongst the hegemony. But if you expand you view to look at the nations surrounding them as long as they weren't actively fighting the power they tended to have their own "golden age". thats where the world is at now, hegemony power balance. however we are facing a crisis and now instead of it being an outside threat it is really internal problems that could potentially lead to the downfall. i tend to agree with what prof said about having the people is key. we don't have the people in office to negotiate this crisis which is why failure is looking more and more possible, instead of a shift. To use an analogy I go back to the Renaissance period hygiene in many European nations. The US only applies more and more make up and perfume to cover up the smell without ever bathing. and I think it is a failure of people not system that has lead to this situation (internal crisis)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#941
#941
LouderVol said:
I agree. in the past when a hegemony came to power it was tolerated as long as it worked, eventually came a crisis that upset it to the point where it didn't work and you saw a collapse. During most of the hegemony's the world went through periods of "golden age" not the least amongst the hegemony. But if you expand you view to look at the nations surrounding them as long as they weren't actively fighting the power they tended to have their own "golden age". thats where the world is at now, hegemony power balance. however we are facing a crisis and now instead of it being an outside threat it is really internal problems that could potentially lead to the downfall. i tend to agree with what prof said about having the people is key. we don't have the people in office to negotiate this crisis which is why failure is looking more and more possible, instead of a shift. To use an analogy I go back to the Renaissance period hygiene in many European nations. The US only applies more and more make up and perfume to cover up the smell without ever bathing. and I think it is a failure of people not system that has lead to this situation (internal crisis)
Click to expand...

The world is becoming increasingly less stable (although it still isn't that bad, at least not yet) because other forces are rising in the world. The US order isn't necessarily weaker; it's just that the past three decades were exceptional (and fairly peaceful/stable) with no other threatening power to counter us. That Russia (although I think it is only temporary) and China (much more permanent) would re-emerge to counter the order, dilute and even negate US hegemony, is neither shocking nor unexpected. Honestly, I wonder what took them so long.

The problem we face is not so much resisting these two foes (as I spelled out above - our model will always triumph in the end), or the global ideology of radical Islam either. The biggest problem we face is ourselves, precisely because, in moments of crisis, people always risk reverting to their primal selves - fueled by emotion rather than rational principle. It is precisely in the moments where raw emotion and passion beckon us to do irrational things that we must demonstrate calm and reserve. It is now when we need men and women that can demonstrate the stoic resolve of the Enlightenment, of the early, floundering American Republic, or even of Rome during the Second Punic War. We need leaders who will calm us, urge us forth passionately only when in service to our values, and who know that the heat of the moment makes not the reality of the situation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#942
#942
n_huffhines said:
Well, this is on the heels of bombing a Doctors without Borders facility. Nobody cares. Not even the Ds.
Click to expand...

Untill 'Muricans realize that both of these parties are actively working together to destroy us with war, decaying morality, counterfeit money, and eroding liberties, then we will continue to spiral down the toilet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#943
#943
#944
#944
Somebody help me out. I'm having a hard time remembering.

There was a nation and many of its leaders recently, somewhere in Europe it seems like, that was accusing another nation of being led by genocidal maniacs and that this nation was actively seeking a policy of ethnic cleansing, maybe in its east.

Seems like this country was mostly just making these accusations merely for political expediency, you know, to stir up its populace for its agenda and to make self-loathers in the West turn against the country it was accusing.

I can't remember what nation that was, the one making the accusations. Anybody remember? I'm thinking it's a country in Eastern Europe somewhere. I'm wanting to think Belarus, but, for some reason that just doesn't quite sound right.
 
#945
#945
volprof said:
Somebody help me out. I'm having a hard time remembering.

There was a nation and many of its leaders recently, somewhere in Europe it seems like, that was accusing another nation of being led by genocidal maniacs and that this nation was actively seeking a policy of ethnic cleansing, maybe in its east.

Seems like this country was mostly just making these accusations merely for political expediency, you know, to stir up its populace for its agenda and to make self-loathers in the West turn against the country it was accusing.

I can't remember what nation that was, the one making the accusations. Anybody remember? I'm thinking it's a country in Eastern Europe somewhere. I'm wanting to think Belarus, but, for some reason that just doesn't quite sound right.
Click to expand...

Paraguay? I know wrong area but **** those guys
 
#946
#946
Things appear to be turning sour for the Russian-led coalition in Syria:

Western Officials: Iran Retreating From Syria Fight - Bloomberg View

I stated from the beginning of Russia's air campaign in Syria that, if we wanted, we could bleed Putin to death there. Well, appears they may be doing that on their own.

At the end of the day, while this may or may not put Russia and Iran back into their place, it will not solve the crisis of Syria, which is essentially how to put back together a nation that can never be put back together. And what do you do about the hardcore jihadists as well?

It will probably take a decade or more, but I think that time will eventually prove that the only way of solving this issue (assuming that anyone is actually willing to take the steps that will be required) is to break Syria into strongly autonomous regions that have no collective central control other than for military protection. This highly limited central govt. will have to be composed of equal representation from all conflicting parties, excluding radical jihadists. Once this order has been established, this new Syrian coalition will have to work together to rid Syria of its radical elements. After that point in time, each constituent part can decide whether or not it wants to remain a part of the new Assad-less Syrian Confederation (essentially just a military treaty), but opting for complete independence will forfeit military protection from the Syrian alliance.

It nearly goes without saying that mass migrations, on a smaller scale of India's partitioning, will be required.
 
#947
#947
volprof said:
Things appear to be turning sour for the Russian-led coalition in Syria:

Western Officials: Iran Retreating From Syria Fight - Bloomberg View

I stated from the beginning of Russia's air campaign in Syria that, if we wanted, we could bleed Putin to death there. Well, appears they may be doing that on their own.

At the end of the day, while this may or may not put Russia and Iran back into their place, it will not solve the crisis of Syria, which is essentially how to put back together a nation that can never be put back together. And what do you do about the hardcore jihadists as well?

It will probably take a decade or more, but I think that time will eventually prove that the only way of solving this issue (assuming that anyone is actually willing to take the steps that will be required) is to break Syria into strongly autonomous regions that have no collective central control other than for military protection. This highly limited central govt. will have to be composed of equal representation from all conflicting parties, excluding radical jihadists. Once this order has been established, this new Syrian coalition will have to work together to rid Syria of its radical elements. After that point in time, each constituent part can decide whether or not it wants to remain a part of the new Assad-less Syrian Confederation (essentially just a military treaty), but opting for complete independence will forfeit military protection from the Syrian alliance.

It nearly goes without saying that mass migrations, on a smaller scale of India's partitioning, will be required.
Click to expand...

Total MSM bull****. Russia and it's allies are dominating the Syrian landscape...
 
#948
#948
Pacer92 said:
Total MSM bull****. Russia and it's allies are dominating the Syrian landscape...
Click to expand...

Even by Russian MOD accounts, which are of course the most flattering depiction of events, I fail to see how they've made a significant dent in ISIS or even in the Syrian opposition. The only thing I can see that has potentially brought any tangible results is the suggestion that some in the Syrian opposition may be willing to work with Assad at some point, although, for every report that comes out about that development in Russian state media another report comes out from the Syrian opposition, denying such claims.

The Russian campaign is still young, believe me, but I fail to see any results thus far.
 
#949
#949
By the way, the little old Wendy's granny is still looking for the beef. She can't find it anywhere.
 
#950
#950
volprof said:
Even by Russian MOD accounts, which are of course the most flattering depiction of events, I fail to see how they've made a significant dent in ISIS or even in the Syrian opposition. The only thing I can see that has potentially brought any tangible results is the suggestion that some in the Syrian opposition may be willing to work with Assad at some point, although, for every report that comes out about that development in Russian state media another report comes out from the Syrian opposition, denying such claims.

The Russian campaign is still young, believe me, but I fail to see any results thus far.
Click to expand...

You fail to see because you only invest into the spoon fed, soothing agenda voice...

Get out the box...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top