Dems Continue to Rehabilitate and Unify With Bush-Era Neocons

anatta said:
blah blah blah..an inability to wield arguments to support your point,so you deflect to my terminology.
*boorish and without substance*
Click to expand...

anatta MO #1
Attack the other poster's intellect with childish and inappropriate adhoms.
ignore and do not reply to the actual message.
 
Amadeus said:
How would you have punished Putin? I mean actual punishment, and not feckless enabling.
Click to expand...
sanctions were fine for the immediate aftermath.
but sanctions without following up with attempts to improve the situation are reactionary.

again realpolitik is interested in improving the relationship/events vs. stagnant more sanctions

we should be offering sanction relief in return for modification of Putin's position.
When Trump wants to talk to Putin he's a "Putin pony"
yet we;'ve already seen the benefits of talking in Syria
 
anatta said:
i've already posted your definition of sanctions is lacking.

now you are reduced to adhoms. you have bankrupted your position to one of frothing.
You tried Buddhism, but did not consider Right View is macro whenn looking at the world
You can't argue against realpolitik.

You can keep your "american bombers' - a neocon response
Click to expand...

irony
 
anatta said:
i've already posted your definition of sanctions is lacking.

now you are reduced to adhoms. you have bankrupted your position to one of frothing.
You tried Buddhism, but did not consider Right View is macro whenn looking at the world
You can't argue against realpolitik.

You can keep your "american bombers' - a neocon response
Click to expand...

"The international community can use sanctions to change the behaviour of a country or regime"

'Can use' is not a definition.

1. a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule.
"a range of sanctions aimed at deterring insider abuse"
synonyms:
penalty, punishment, deterrent; More
punitive action, discipline, restriction;
embargo, ban, prohibition, boycott
"trade sanctions"
antonyms:
reward
Philosophy
a consideration operating to enforce obedience to any rule of conduct.

2. official permission or approval for an action.
"he appealed to the bishop for his sanction"
synonyms:
authorization, consent, leave, permission, authority, warrant, license, dispensation, assent, acquiescence, agreement, approval, approbation, endorsement, accreditation, ratification, validation, blessing, imprimatur
 
anatta said:
sanctions were fine for the immediate aftermath.
but sanctions without following up with attempts to improve the situation are reactionary.

again realpolitik is interested in improving the relationship/events vs. stagnant more sanctions

we should be offering sanction relief in return for modification of Putin's position.
When Trump wants to talk to Putin he's a "Putin pony"
yet we;'ve already seen the benefits of talking in Syria
Click to expand...

What a tool you are. What benefits in Syria? Russia has successfully saved Assad's regime and decimated the mostly-civilian uprising. The only question now is whether or not Assad will change his behavior (he won't), and/or retaliate and massacre the remaining opposition as he promised (he will).

You're a tool because you let Russia take a thousand steps forward, and want him to take one step back in exchange for sanctions relief.
 
anatta said:
right. because my mental clarity is the best it's ever been. I can see thru the noise of Russiaphobia -you lick it's boots.

But do continue your word salad express, it's comical relief
Click to expand...

why can you not see that Trump is a charlatan if your vision is so clear?

how do you miss his dishonesty, his impotence, his diseased mind, his mediority of leadership, his vanity, selfishness and false pride?

his mean spiritedness, his lack of compassion?

by all means illustrate your "vision"
 
1.png


Bleed them dry.

Military men on both sides of the Atlantic have been using the “Russian threat” to convince governments to throw more money into defense budgets for years. In 2015, the Pentagon used the idea of war with Russia as a public rallying cry to stave off budget cuts. Instead of responding with laughter and the appropriate facts, much of the media advocated on the Pentagon’s behalf, propagating the idea that perhaps the United States really would struggle to match Russian military power in a head-to-head.*

In the case of the U.S., the hyping of the Russian threat is particularly ridiculous. Think of it this way: In his first budget proposal, President Donald Trump seeks to increase U.S. defense spending by $54 billion. That 10 percent hike in American military spending would amount to 80 percent of Russia’s entire military budget — and that’s before the recent Russian cuts are taken into account.

The U.S. spends around $600 billion yearly on its military. Russia’s spends one-tenth of that amount, roughly $60 billion. With the new cuts, Russia will go from the fourth-largest military spender in the world to the eighth-largest, falling behind India and France.
http://www.salon.com/2017/03/19/so-...e-spending-while-trump-plans-massive-buildup/
 
blackascoal said:
"The international community can use sanctions to change the behaviour of a country or regime"

'Can use' is not a definition.

1. a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule.
"a range of sanctions aimed at deterring insider abuse"
synonyms:
penalty, punishment, deterrent; More
punitive action, discipline, restriction;
embargo, ban, prohibition, boycott
"trade sanctions"
antonyms:
reward
Philosophy
a consideration operating to enforce obedience to any rule of conduct.

2. official permission or approval for an action.
"he appealed to the bishop for his sanction"
synonyms:
authorization, consent, leave, permission, authority, warrant, license, dispensation, assent, acquiescence, agreement, approval, approbation, endorsement, accreditation, ratification, validation, blessing, imprimatur
Click to expand...

anatta is not a fan of dictionary definitions since they don't match his own
 
blackascoal said:
"The international community can use sanctions to change the behaviour of a country or regime"

'Can use' is not a definition.

1. a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule.
"a range of sanctions aimed at deterring insider abuse"
synonyms:
penalty, punishment, deterrent; More
punitive action, discipline, restriction;
embargo, ban, prohibition, boycott
"trade sanctions"
antonyms:
reward
Philosophy
a consideration operating to enforce obedience to any rule of conduct.

2. official permission or approval for an action.
"he appealed to the bishop for his sanction"
synonyms:
authorization, consent, leave, permission, authority, warrant, license, dispensation, assent, acquiescence, agreement, approval, approbation, endorsement, accreditation, ratification, validation, blessing, imprimatur
Click to expand...
you give the static dictionary definition. I give the dynamic geo-political definition.
which one is apropos to this discussion?
 
Rune said:
he became completely obsessed with HRC.
He would post of nothing else save Libya which he entirely attributed to her.

he has now switched his obsession to Trump and Russia
Click to expand...
not "entirely" you have a grotesque inability to use correct limitations..what did I always say?
"She was the chief international organizer and US advocate" .further that is not my own words, that is her own State dept

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRC_Email_1_296/HRCH1/DOC_0C05739752/C05739752.pdf
From: Jake Sullivan
Sant: Sunday, August 21, 2011 7:40 PM
To: Mills, Cheryl D; Nuiand, Victoria J
Subject: tidc todc on libya
this is basically off the top of my head, with a few consultations of my notes. but it shows S'Clinton
leadership/ownership/stewardship of this country's libya policy from start to finish, let me know what you
think. toria, who else might be able to add to this?
Secretary Clinton's leadership on Libya
HRC
has been a critical voice on Libya in administration deliberations, at NATO, and in contact group
meetings — as well as the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya. She was instrumental in securing the
authorization, building the coalition, and tightening the noose around Qadhafi and his regime
 
Amadeus said:
What a tool you are. What benefits in Syria? Russia has successfully saved Assad's regime and decimated the mostly-civilian uprising. The only question now is whether or not Assad will change his behavior (he won't), and/or retaliate and massacre the remaining opposition as he promised (he will).

You're a tool because you let Russia take a thousand steps forward, and want him to take one step back in exchange for sanctions relief.
Click to expand...
are you insane? where do you see a "civilian uprising" -have you taken a look at the Syria lately? It's one large battlefield with crumbling infrastructure.

Whatever the Arab Spring was supposed to bring all it brought to Syria was a bunch of terrorists,and regional troops and proxies using the body of Syria as a war of attrition

Don't talk to me of Syria, you don't understand anything except "Assad must go"and I'm sure you never thought past that meme of what happens next..

How were you planning on stopping Russia's "ten thousand steps forward?" sanctions?
putting in 20,000 troops like McCain wants? :rofl2:

you have no clue of the battlefield or the players or why Russia is defending it's client state.
You are 100% ignorant of the ground and the geopolitical forces/proxies in play.
 
blackascoal said:
Bleed them dry.

Military men on both sides of the Atlantic have been using the “Russian threat” to convince governments to throw more money into defense budgets for years. In 2015, the Pentagon used the idea of war with Russia as a public rallying cry to stave off budget cuts. Instead of responding with laughter and the appropriate facts, much of the media advocated on the Pentagon’s behalf, propagating the idea that perhaps the United States really would struggle to match Russian military power in a head-to-head.*

In the case of the U.S., the hyping of the Russian threat is particularly ridiculous. Think of it this way: In his first budget proposal, President Donald Trump seeks to increase U.S. defense spending by $54 billion. That 10 percent hike in American military spending would amount to 80 percent of Russia’s entire military budget — and that’s before the recent Russian cuts are taken into account.

The U.S. spends around $600 billion yearly on its military. Russia’s spends one-tenth of that amount, roughly $60 billion. With the new cuts, Russia will go from the fourth-largest military spender in the world to the eighth-largest, falling behind India and France.
http://www.salon.com/2017/03/19/so-...e-spending-while-trump-plans-massive-buildup/
Click to expand...
not gonna work. you can spend and spend and spend, and militarize and militarize,
but it's not going to make Putin go away. Th inconvenient truth is he has the 2nd most powerful military in the world.

NATO can put in as much as they want, but the position is a stalemate -just like sanctions do not change Putin's behavior, more spending doesn't de-fang his military.

what you should be looking at is LEVERAGING our superior military, to effect change.
and before you do that on the battlefield, you have to open up diplomacy.


does any of this sound familiar? this is the norm on how states confront each other -using a wide variety of tools-
in other words realpolitik
 
anatta said:
not gonna work. you can spend and spend and spend, and militarize and militarize,
but it's not going to make Putin go away. Th inconvenient truth is he has the 2nd most powerful military in the world.

NATO can put in as much as they want, but the position is a stalemate -just like sanctions do not change Putin's behavior, more spending doesn't de-fang his military.

what you should be looking at is LEVERAGING our superior military, to effect change.
and before you do that on the battlefield, you have to open up diplomacy.


does any of this sound familiar? this is the norm on how states confront each other -using a wide variety of tools-
in other words realpolitik
Click to expand...

More irrelevant words.

Talking loud, saying nothing.

It demonstrates that Putin cannot keep up and cannot sustain his misadventures .. no matter how much he bleeds his own people .. which is something that a 'Buddist' like you doesn't care about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top