This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test  (Read 7158 times)

Garry G

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • G
  • Posts: 517
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #135 on: March 22, 2024, 03:41:06 PM »
Liberals are all about moral relativism until someone does something they don't like.

And vice versa it seems.
Calling you a moron and ignoring your bilge isn't the same thing as censorship you disingenuous cretin.

You have a right to free speech in America, not a right to be believed.

That's possibly coherent in some sort of other context.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11749
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #136 on: March 22, 2024, 06:48:04 PM »
I'm not sure where you're going with this.
...
Free speech and democracy aren't a panacea, but they're better than the alternatives, in my opinion.

i hope i explained myself better this time. maybe i'm jumping at something that's not really there - if so, i apologize. being constantly called names and ridiculed simply for being a russian and having a different perspective on things  does affect one sometimes. i'd just note that if your whole point is that you jhkim is for everything that's good and against everythihng that's not, that doesn't leave much room for discussion, you know.

I mean, yeah, I have my beliefs about what is good. But that doesn't mean that I'm opposed to discussion and learning more. A key reason I support freedom of speech is that people (including me) should question their assumptions and learn from others. If there isn't free speech and the government shuts down opposing views, that isn't possible.


I visited Moscow in 2009, and tried to learn what I could during my time there.

the point is, by just visiting moscow you, as a foreigner, experience something you cannot really hope to comprehend without the context that can only be aqcuired over many years of being immersed in the culture and history. and the latest changes i mentioned - which all happened while the clowns we have in power since soviet union's collapse were still hoping to be accepted as full members of western capitalist camarilla - heavily obscure what's there besides, especially to the new eye, used to the western culture.

Obviously, living in a place means one knows more. You'll know more about Russia than I do, and I'll know more about the U.S. and San Francisco than you will. If there are points that you think I should particularly know, then let me know.


so, do putin and co play on different national and social field? - absolutely. russian mentality, traditions, perceptions of things like "freedom if speech" "legitimacy of power" and all that are vastly different from those in the west,  so yes, they push different political buttons to get into power and maintain it's legitimacy in russia. and they give less and less fucks about what you think about it in the west, especially after seeing what imperialistic fucking assholes you have in power there been doing around the world since there wasn't soviet union to counter-balance them anymore.

I feel like we Americans have mostly been stoking war in the Middle East as far as foreign policy -- which is roughly the same thing we were doing when the Soviet Union was around. So yeah, we're assholes, but I don't think it's worse than before 1991. If anything, the Middle East wars before 1991 were even bloodier than today. So I'm not convinced that the previous balance of power was making things better.

Klava

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #137 on: March 23, 2024, 05:45:02 AM »
You'll know more about Russia than I do, and I'll know more about the U.S. and San Francisco than you will. If there are points that you think I should particularly know, then let me know.

the point is not that i know more than you about russia - that much is obvious. the point is, that by visiting just moscow someone like you doesn't learn much about russia at all. moscow is a mess that you had zero chance of making sense of, much less making any kind of informed opinion about russia as a whole on the basis of.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out

ralfy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #138 on: March 24, 2024, 02:15:38 AM »
From Stoltenberg, head of NATO, to the Heritage Foundation:

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_222258.htm

Quote
China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are increasingly aligned. Together, they subvert sanctions and pressure. Weaken the US dollar-based international financial system. Fuel Russian war in Europe. And exploit challenges to our societies, such as terrorism, disruptive technologies, or migration.

In these dangerous times, we must stand strong against any regime that seeks to undermine us.

It's not just the four countries involved but BRICS and the Global South. BRICS refers to Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and the Global South to everyone other than G-7, etc. Examples of configurations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerging_market

Examples are MINT, EAGLE, CIVETS, NEST, Next Eleven, and more. Together, they make up the growing global middle class that is taking over the world economy:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-22956470

Several of them are subverting sanctions but also coming up with new economic blocs, bilateral deals, and plans to move away from the dollar.

That's the same dollar that characterizes the international financial system and what gives real power to the U.S., allowing for a unipolar global economy.

As more countries become economically stronger, then they become less reliant on the dollar. When that happens, then the U.S. can't continue its heavy borrowing and spending binge, which it started in the early 1980s thanks to voodoo economics or Reaganomics:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/164163-krugman-and-the-pied-pipers-of-debt



And the U.S. needed to do that because when the dollar became a global reserve currency, its exports became too expensive for most, which is why it began experiencing chronic trade deficits less than a decade earlier.

Much of spending from debt is needed for consumer spending and for the military, which is the most expensive in the world and most expansive, with over 700 military bases and installations worldwide.

That's why Stoltenberg unwittingly pointed out the truth: the goal of NATO is to protect the U.S.-led international financial system, and that means keeping other countries weak and thus dependent on the dollar through various means of manipulation but also intervention. But it's no longer working because many members of BRICS and the Global South have become too strong economically and have been answering back.

And the result may be a multipolar world.

Daztur

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
  • Classical Libertarian
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #139 on: March 25, 2024, 01:22:19 AM »
From Stoltenberg, head of NATO, to the Heritage Foundation:

*snip*

That chart only goes up to 2009. Do you have anything more recent? I'd assume that there was some deleveraging during the Great Recession and then a lot more debt during the Pandemic but that's just a guess.

That seems part and parcel of Financialization being a longstanding trend in the US economy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization

ralfy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #140 on: March 25, 2024, 11:38:42 PM »
From Stoltenberg, head of NATO, to the Heritage Foundation:

*snip*

That chart only goes up to 2009. Do you have anything more recent? I'd assume that there was some deleveraging during the Great Recession and then a lot more debt during the Pandemic but that's just a guess.

That seems part and parcel of Financialization being a longstanding trend in the US economy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization

I think the total debt just kept rising:

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

and got worse because recovery from the 2009 crash involved taking on more debt:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/traceygreenstein/2011/09/20/the-feds-16-trillion-bailouts-under-reported/

Also, it reached a point where the country has to borrow to pay for just the interest rate of previous debt, which in turn is piling up.

You're correct about financialization. In the U.S., it involved Reaganomics or voodoo economics, where deregulation allowed the finance industry to create more credit, which the country needed for financial gambling (e.g., house-flipping), consumer spending (something like a quarter of the world's passenger vehicles are found in the states, which has only around 5 pct of the world's population; it's something like one vehicle for every adult citizen), and military spending (the country has over 700 military bases and installations worldwide and a military budget that's equivalent to that of the next several military powers combined).

The U.S. employed this because the U.S. dollar is used as a global reserve currency, which in turn led to chronic trade deficits starting in the mid-1970s, and for which recovery could only involve creating more debt and spending it.

The catch is that the value of the dollar is dependent on demand for it worldwide. That means as countries become stronger economically, they eventually become less dependent on it and focus more on bilateral ties, new economic blocs, and new financial systems like special drawing rights:

https://www.dw.com/en/will-brics-expansion-set-a-new-agenda-for-the-global-south/a-67725812

This will be a problem for the U.S. because with a multipolar global economy it won't be able to take on more debt to cover more spending. That's why it had to manipulate Ukraine and other countries to keep them weak and thus dependent on the U.S.

That's what Stoltenberg meant when he was talking about the dollar-dominated international financial system.




SHARK

  • The Great Shark Hope
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5040
Re: The war in Ukraine doesn't pass the sniff test
« Reply #141 on: March 26, 2024, 05:50:22 AM »
From Stoltenberg, head of NATO, to the Heritage Foundation:

*snip*

That chart only goes up to 2009. Do you have anything more recent? I'd assume that there was some deleveraging during the Great Recession and then a lot more debt during the Pandemic but that's just a guess.

That seems part and parcel of Financialization being a longstanding trend in the US economy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization

I think the total debt just kept rising:

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

and got worse because recovery from the 2009 crash involved taking on more debt:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/traceygreenstein/2011/09/20/the-feds-16-trillion-bailouts-under-reported/

Also, it reached a point where the country has to borrow to pay for just the interest rate of previous debt, which in turn is piling up.

You're correct about financialization. In the U.S., it involved Reaganomics or voodoo economics, where deregulation allowed the finance industry to create more credit, which the country needed for financial gambling (e.g., house-flipping), consumer spending (something like a quarter of the world's passenger vehicles are found in the states, which has only around 5 pct of the world's population; it's something like one vehicle for every adult citizen), and military spending (the country has over 700 military bases and installations worldwide and a military budget that's equivalent to that of the next several military powers combined).

The U.S. employed this because the U.S. dollar is used as a global reserve currency, which in turn led to chronic trade deficits starting in the mid-1970s, and for which recovery could only involve creating more debt and spending it.

The catch is that the value of the dollar is dependent on demand for it worldwide. That means as countries become stronger economically, they eventually become less dependent on it and focus more on bilateral ties, new economic blocs, and new financial systems like special drawing rights:

https://www.dw.com/en/will-brics-expansion-set-a-new-agenda-for-the-global-south/a-67725812

This will be a problem for the U.S. because with a multipolar global economy it won't be able to take on more debt to cover more spending. That's why it had to manipulate Ukraine and other countries to keep them weak and thus dependent on the U.S.

That's what Stoltenberg meant when he was talking about the dollar-dominated international financial system.

Greetings!

PREACH ON, Ralfy!

Absolutely true. Dr. Steve Turley has discussed these dynamics and realities in his program through the years. He talks about BRICS, the Global South, Civilizational Changes, all this stuff on a regular basis.

Good stuff.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security b