Jump to content

Shady Ray

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    544
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Shady Ray

  1. This was beautiful. My thoughts and prayers to your family during this time. Your mother seemed like a beautiful person.
  2. For a little more background on the Original Post. (and sorry, I am an idiot when it comes to posting twitters, so in case this doesn't post correctly, here is the text of the full twitter thread): I, for one, am thrilled that these fine young gentlemen will have the best of US military-grade technology at their disposal in a few short years. EDIT: Also, in reference to song that they are apparently singing and its association with the death of infant Ali Dewabsheh:
  3. I know nothing gets dicks hard like the Bundesliga 3, but I do want to just note that my beloved 1860 has clawed its way into sight of Bundesliga 2 with two to go. Remaining matches are against Bayern II and Ingolstadt. Please Uli Hoeneß, please keep your future superstars on that bench where they belong....please, you dirty sorry bastard!!! With Rona slowly letting up over here, having 1860 in the 2nd league would just be glorious. So, Surly, extend your hands to ol' Shady Ray and lift ya' spirit.
  4. Or, more accurately, Bill just "wasn't inclined to ask questions" about that pending 2010 DOJ child-trafficking investigation being launched against Epstein after reading about it in the New York Times, Post, Newsweek, etc...oh, which was an investigation that occurred AFTER that pesky little Federal plea deal that Epstein took three years before Bill's first meeting with him, where Epstein acknowledged that he had been soliciting 14-year olds. It isn't like they were old friends. Gates didn't start associating with him until 3 years after he cut his plea deal. So it isn't about the girls around him being of age...it was about Epstein being -at a minimum - a known predator with an established history of abusing children. Hell, I was living in South Florida during the year before the two of them met and Epstein's case was all over the news there and in New York. Perhaps as a low-level corporate lawyer at the time I just happened to have my finger on the goings-on of the billionaire class more than Bill Gates did. 🙄 And I am not saying Bill is a kiddie-diddler. What I am saying is that I am pretty confident that this entire board of degenerates would view such behavior as socially disqualifying, so the same should apply for "the smartest guy in the room".
  5. Well aware of OCCRP, but my point remains...this has (and remains) a sturdy source for Western media so long as it implicates non-US affiliated entities or narratives. The second it does not, it is conveniently overlooked. Convenient that. Same goes for the other media entities. But I will agree with you otherwise...responsibility does go to the top, R or D. And none of them give a shit.
  6. Yes, this is true. The Military should absolutely be watched much, much more closely. And I agree, the CIA‘s actions are determined by the ethos of its individual leaders, but unfortunately the Agency has operated in a way where those who operate the most aggressively for their corporate and hawkish political overlords are the ones who ascend. CIA respects and cherishes democracy until it runs up against the objectives of their corporate/hawk paymasters, at which time democratic ideals must be set aside. However, as far as the ability of the average American voter to serve as an effective check on them at the ballot box, that’s pretty laughable given the intelligence of the average US voter when it comes to anything further afield than Cancun. And even if the voter had a clue, your point operates from the position that the elected officials and The People at large (even if they were inclined to give a fuck) have proper access to what these intelligence agencies are up to in a timeframe that could make a difference through an even remotely curious and critical media. The CIA has long manufactured consent for its nefarious deeds by playing a central role in creating a system where the media is dependent on toeing the IC line in order to get scoops or promotions. Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent and all that jazz. So, no, their feet can’t be held to the fire when - at best - the truth comes out 10-30 years after the fact. Can anyone with a critical mind truly believe that the Agency stopped intense efforts to directly control media narratives when Mockingbird was said to have ended in the late 70s because Frank Church said to do so? Come on. For example...There was a huge story here in Germany that was broken by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), Deutsche Welle, the Balkan Investigating Reporting Network (BIRN) and the Süddeutsche Zeitung (Munich newspaper, German paper of record) a couple of years back that went into deeeeeep detail of the US IC using US bases in Germany/Ex-yugo arms manufacturers to funnel well over two billion dollars in weapons into the hands of Syrian Sunni militias (and no, not the Kurds, but AQ types) in the early 2010s as part of the CIAs Operation Timber Sycamore. It was a HUGE spread with multiple parts and plenty of coverage. There were verified emails to Balkan arms manufacturers from USG contractors, emails from Pentagon officials blatantly flouting arms control regs, invoices showing countless treaty violations, correspondence showing the US pushing for the de-mothballing of Balkan arms manufacturers (because what could go wrong with the Balkans re-igniting their arms trade?), flight logs showing illegal weapons shipments from CIA affiliated air transports...the whole 9 yards. Got so big that the Germans threatened to launch legal action against the US for violating intl arms conventions by using their territory for such bullshittery. This was a story that warranted reporting in the US. Regardless of whether one supported arming Syria or not, it was news. But not a fucking word was mentioned in the US media. Not. A. Fucking. Word. Pulitzer level journos from abroad (who, by the way, are regularly cited on other matters by western media) definitely proving US IC and military violation arms control treaties and being threatened with suit by a loyal NATO ally...and what was the NYT and WaPo doing? Sweet fuck all is what. Oh, they will use OCCRP, Deutsche Welle, and Suddeutsche Zeitung ALLLLL the time on non-pentagon/non-IC matters, but oddly enough, not in this case. Or any other case in which SZ or BRIN or OCCRP have reported against US intelligence/military interests. Gun shop in Croatia? No. US-funded Bulgarian weapon trade? No. Ramstein being used as an illegal weapons depot? Not a fucking chance. I could go on and on about what all was reported. It shouldn’t require a US Citizen to be able to read foreign language media regularly to get an idea of such huge violations using taxpayers money to arm jihadi insurgents. Regardless of where one falls on the issue of weapons shipments to Syria, it was news and it was embargoed by every single US media outlet. I can only imagine how frequently this plays out allllll over the world. Fortunately, I got a glimpse because I am a German speaker with a daily subscription to the SZ...otherwise, I'd have nary a clue. So you have an IC (and military) community that essentially operates on an information black hole (or at most generous..a severe “information lag”) as far as its dirty deeds coming to light, so the entire idea of regulating them in the court of public opinion is naive. It won’t happen because it (by design) can’t happen given the state of our pathetic media. And the CIAs awful behavior in SE Asia, Africa, the ME and Latin America was authorized, enabled and encouraged from the top of the organization. There is no way that Dulles, Colby, Casey, Helms, Bush Sr et al all the way to Woolsey Tenet and Haspel etc weren’t involved in overseeing and approving the terrible acts committed in our names. And they weren’t just “gathering intel”. They were actively toppling elected regimes, arming some of the worst people on the planet, enabling genocidal regimes from Central America to Africa to the ME and SE Asia, and robbing huge swathes of wealth from local populations through revolutions and puppet regimes for the benefit of their patrons. These aren't rogue agents. This is a systemically corrupt organization that both parties allow to operate because the parties are part of the problem. If these acts were done by KGB most Americans would be absolutely (and rightly) appalled, so I don’t see why they should get a pass because they are “our team”.
  7. Legacy of Ashes really is a great book and truly shows how truly off the rails CIA has been for the vast majority of its existence. Allen Dulles and his ilk were such complete pieces of shit who truly set the direction of the agency full-tilt toward the corrupt, anti-democratic organization that it is today. I also recommend CIA as Organized Crime and The Phoenix Program by Douglas Valentine. What CIA did in Southeast Asia for decades is revolting and, unfortunately, it only served as a template for the carnage it has gone on to inflict all over the world.
  8. Given their 40-year penchant for extensively funding, training and arming Sunni extremism all over the globe, I have fixed it for you.
  9. Got Pfizer-BioNTech 1 yesterday, which is a miracle here in Germany given how delinquent the EU has been in securing vaccines. But BioNTech donated doses to my employer, as we are considered "critical infrastructure" by the German government, so I carpe muthafuckin' diemed. I feel fine so far. I am preparing to get buck wild and travel all about this fair land with my laminated card once round 2 is in place, regardless of whether the biergartens are open...because there is always a cold beer and an empty park bench somewhere. Mrs. Shady Ray is roughly same age and her estimated vaccine window is end of summer/early fall. Hope she makes it through OK in the meantime.
  10. Sorry to hear that, man. Good on ya Roo for all the joy you brought.
  11. Ahhhh, if it twas only a "future" conversation. My in-laws were over a couple of weeks back so that my father-in-law and I could watch Champions League soccer. Bob decided to drag his blanket onto his "place" on the ottoman and then proceeded to go to town on it about three feet in front of my mother-in-law's face. As she gazed upon Bob's perverted ways, all she said in her thick Bavarian accent was, "Hmm. Das ist nicht gut." Cheeky bastard.
  12. We got Bob back in October. Bob's favorite hobbies at the moment are humping the ever-loving dignity out of his blanket, sneaking random rocks into the house, and watching birds in the back yard. He's not the dumbest dog and he's not the smartest dog, but either way, he's turning into a pretty damn good one.
  13. Shady Ray

    Russia

    I don't know anything about the American lawyer, but Alexander Feduta is a fairly outspoken critic (and used to be a part) of Lukashenko's inner circle until they had some type of falling out years ago. He's featured on Deutsche Welle from time to time here and comments frequently in international publications re Lukashenko. Not sure beyond that, given that it involves the journalistic black hole that is fucking Belarus. Either way, not a particularly bright idea to be strolling around Moscow with that pedigree in the current climate.
  14. Shady Ray

    Russia

    Interesting. One of the guys arrested is a dual US Citizen who had been in Poland prior to heading into Moscow, so will be interesting to see how this plays out in the US. And will be interesting to see if Russia releases the recordings which they claim to have. And from TASS, which is of course Russian state media...
  15. Shady Ray

    Russia

    With Biden calling Putin yesterday and publicly offering a summit to discuss the gamut of issues between the US and Russia, plus (as is being reported here) the USS Roosevelt and USS Donald Cook now cancelling their entry into the Black Sea, it looks like this flare up in Ukraine may have peaked. Russian media will paint this as a climb-down by the West and Western media will paint this as skillful diplomacy averting a crisis, I imagine.
  16. Shady Ray

    Russia

    Although all of this is true, don't kid yourself, pal...he's got the only option he needs.
  17. Shady Ray

    Russia

    Likewise @956 Worldwide. I definitely appreciate your position and see it as valid and well-reasoned…lots of great stuff there. On that note, I am curious to your thoughts on the current situation in Ukraine. I think that regardless of whether one views NATO expansion along with the subsequent skirmishes along the Russian frontier such as Ukraine and Georgia as protecting citizenry or expanding an empire, we are where we are, and my concern is if Russia truly believe “NATO as aggressor” version of things, this Ukrainian situation could potentially be much larger than we have the stomach for. I’ll tell a little story of a young Shady Ray. Back in 2003 when I was fresh out of school and running about Vilnius, I ended up striking up a friendship with a retired high ranking officer in the US Navy. Let’s call him Bob. Bob is also an absolutely brilliant maritime lawyer and to this day is considered one of the leading experts on the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea. Bob was doing some advising in the Baltics at the time. I don’t want get into any more details on Bob, as even now in his older years is still active in very senior “informal” advisory roles, but let’s just say his title, positions held, the individuals he has personally advised in official capacities, and the academic works he has published on strategy re naval operations would conclusively prove that this dude knows the score. Definitely one of the smartest people I have ever met. Anyway, over a period of about a year, I would regularly meet up with Bob and his wife (she was over 60 at the time, so no pics) for beers at this great little Lithuanian cellar pub to shoot the shit. Well, at the time, NATO accession was in the cards for the Baltics and they were set to join the following year. The Russians, of course, were pitching a fit and rattling their (much weaker at the time) sabres about their security interests re the Baltics … blah blah blah. Typical Russian shit. Well, over drinks one night, I asked Bob about their bellicosity re the Baltics and he dismissed it outright saying, “Meh. It ain’t the Black Sea, so they’ll just bitch and moan about it, but nothing more.” In differentiating the two regions, Bob went on to talk about the existential nature of not only access to the Black Sea with respect to the Russian Navy, which is well known…access to the med, seapower projection, “Sevastopol as Annapolis”, etc…but also the Russian view that it lead to THE absolute spot of vulnerability inland on which their entire national security depends. His opinion was that the Russians would sacrifice everything to secure what they view as “The Eastern Gateway” of their southwest and that the battles throughout history had engrained into the psyche of Russian leadership that maintaining absolute control of this specific area - either directly or via friendly proxy in Kiev - was absolutely, 100% non-negotiable and ANY violation of that would result in a hot war. Of course, he went on to discuss the situation in Chechnya, which was ongoing and of course was proving to be a pivotal moment in Putin’s early consolidation of power internally, and he again differentiated saying, “The Russians are now completely inwardly-focused and will continue to be so. Talking heads may say they are tied up in Chechnya to deter further piecemeal erosion of their country, but that is a secondary issue...the real issue to them is complete and total fortification …buffer zones…and they will fight to keep control that natural barrier of the Caucasus. But even so, absolutely nothing geographically is as vital as their control over access to the steppe in their Southwest. If that falls, it’s a highway to the centers of political and industrial power and they’ll go hot to ensure it doesn't.” I often think about how definitively he spoke in his analysis here, even when Russia was a shell of what they are now militarily, and I think subsequent events have shown that ol’ Bob was right. In 2008 in Georgia, and 2014 in Ukraine, Russian behavior at their frontiers have been entirely consistent with this. Maintain proxy control via compliant governments over the areas they can’t control directly, and if that proxy becomes compromised - or more specifically, if that proxy starts receiving NATO weaponry and NATO advisors start showing up on the ground - then use the local Russian populace as pretext to show aggression, carve out a buffer and beyond, freeze the conflict, back off "the beyond" into the buffer. Rinse, repeat. And specifically with respect to 2014, their behavior in a full-blown annexation of Crimea - even by Russian standards - was blatant and highly, highly risky. They knew full well the potential fallout and pariah status that this would result in, but they did it nevertheless. So to us, viewing this from the West, this may justifiably be about Ukraine’s self-determination, ally selection, access to economic betterment, right vs. wrong, etc. But to Moscow, if this is truly is existential in their mentality, I think that they very well may approach this entire conflict with a “Fuck around and find out” mentality. Think about it…as is typical with Russia, the news coverage in the anglosphere is dumbed-down and it tends to start with the movement of Russian troops…which proved to be the case here. But what is not covered is the internal situation in Kiev at the moment. Zelensky’s numbers are in the shitter at the moment along with the general Ukrainian economy. And a huge portion of his parliamentary/popular support is drawn upon by the Ukrainian nationalist element of the spectrum. So, back on March 11th his government announced that they were passing “The Ukrainian Strategy for De-Occupation and Reintegration of Crimea”, which occurred formally in parliament on the 24th. That measure explicitly called for re-taking Crimea by force, if necessary. Which certainly constituted a re-focus over what had been the frozen state of affairs in the Donbas over the past few years. And then NATO advisors show up, Biden goes on TV calling Putin a killer, meetings start occurring between Zelensky and Western leaders in Europe, western weapon shipments start arriving, and troop movements start on the Ukrainian side of the Donbas that week. The Russians strategically escalate and start moving troops very, very publicly to the border. Big show…cameras, statements, etc. And to date, it is an overwhelming amount that have amassed. And what I found very telling was Lavrov’s explicit statement that if an offensive occurred in the Donbas, Ukraine as a whole would then be destroyed. Say what you will about the Russians…and particularly Lavrov, but he is a smart, deliberate mother-fucker who tends not to deal in inflammatory language as a matter of PR policy. This was a statement for Ukraine..not for us, and I think they may actually mean it. Now is this all a show by Zelensky to rally support internally with the right wing showing his willingness to be tough with Russia? It could very well be. Or is it an actual prelude to initial actions in the Donbas as a precursor to moving on Crimea, as per their recent legislative act? I think that is unlikely, but nevertheless, I guess it is still a possibility. Or is it simply a move designed to gauge Russian response under a new administration? Could be. But to Moscow when viewed from the lens of their rightly or wrongly held view of “NATO the Aggressor” - this very well could be the next step in what they see as continued probing of their soft underbelly, and, therefore, is existential. My feeling is that this has actually blown over during the last 48 hours, particularly given that Western Europe, specifically Merkel and Macron, has been very reluctant to engage with Zelensky but each have been willing to speak directly to Putin multiple times reiterating their support for a solution within the parameters of Minsk 2. Nevertheless, when countries with the capability to go big legitimately feel threatened, shit can go sideways. I guess to wind it down, in my opinion, Crimea is gone unless we decide to intervene. Ukrainian forces aren’t going to do sweet fuck all to a determined Russia, so the statement of returning it by all means, including military operations, is either purely political for domestic consumption, or it is dependent on intervention by the West. They know that when push comes to shove, the American people have no desire to open up a NATO conflict over Ukraine. God knows Western Europe doesn’t. But it wouldn’t be the first time powder kegs get inadvertently lit by poor leadership and/or unexpected events on the ground.
  18. Shady Ray

    Russia

    While it is true that formal agreement on the topic of NATO expansion could have and should have been more formalized during the period of Unification and the final days of the USSR, it is indisputable that a whole host of western leaders and diplomats acknowledged Gorbachev's concern about Russian security re NATO and gave some degree of assurance that what ended up happening would not, in fact, happen. There are all kinds of records showing how important this subject was to the Soviet leadership and how extensive the US, British and West German discussions actually were, even extending to formally discussing a hypothetical re NATO's admission of Warsaw in the event they sought to join NATO. The present sense impressions of those around these discussions ranging from diplomats to pols to intel officers present at discussions are extensive and are recorded at the National Security Archive. Sure, that doesn't mean that the archives are dispositive, because they certainly are not, but to say that the Russians are just picking and choosing when politically convenient is a bit of a stretch when the archival record at a minimum puts their perception that a deal was broken at least within the realm of "reasonableness". https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early#_edn4 Of course, that certainly doesn't diminish the rest of your point about depriving agency to ex-Warsaw Pact states, but as you rightly pointed out, membership is a two-way street and the leading voices in NATO at the time (The Bush Sr. Admin, Thatcher, Kohl, Genscher, etc) at a minimum could reasonably be seen based on evidence to have given Gorbachev reason to believe that our lane on that two-way street was going to be closed and they were well aware that Gorbachev was taking these discussions back to Moscow to the larger leadership as a whole. And - at least from the Russian perspective- the "closed lane" was essentially about as "closed" the left lane on the autobahn as soon as shit settled down. But I think your assertion that Russia has an unreasonably dark view of how alliances work is missing the context of how we have been perceived to have acted over the last 30 years at some pivotal moments in their post-Soviet development. I have referenced this before, I think, but I lived in Moscow for all of 2002 and Vilnius in 2003-2004, and the perceptions of what had happened over the preceding ten years by young Russians and young Balts was night and day, which is understandable. The younger, "soon-to-be-managerial-class" of Balts that I knew of course had essentially identical perspectives of what we see in our media day in and day out re the potential for Russian aggression. The young Russian lawyers with whom I worked at the time - all of whom had been western educated to some degree - genuinely viewed us as having 1) Lied about NATO expansion, 2) Single-handedly financed/installed a corrupt and incompetent president in the form of Yeltsin and by extension his corrupt system of privatization cronyism (which of course we proceeded to reinforce by blasting boastful, triumphant first-person accounts in our media of how we literally did just that) and 3) Via the entire situation, which I think we discussed upthread) with the Harvard crowd like Larry Summers, Robert Rubin, Hay, etc. fleeced large amounts of Russian national wealth alongside the oligarchs that they supported in the 90s. Was much of this due to their exposure to Russian media-spin at the time? Of course, but we did do a ton of what we were accused of doing, so they weren't entirely wrong. To be clear, I am not saying that I agree with this as being the "whole story", but there is absolutely valid criticism of our actions and I think that viewing the conflict on Russia's borders in a vacuum like the American media tends to do a disservice to anyone seeking an accurate understanding of what is driving this. Literally the exact same people... (or their proteges in the case of Victoria Nuland and Blinken and Sullivan) facilitated money/advisors/media networks to bring Yeltsin back from the political grave...and then proceeded to carry out the original NATO Expansion in the late-1990s ... and then went to thinktanks during GWB years and penned weekly missives in the pages of Brookings' journal advocating regime change in Russia...only to then come back into government to literally work at the Kiev Embassy during the original Maidan...and now the exact same people/proteges are back as the literal top of the diplomatic/national security apparatus in Washington. Of course, the fact that people in positions of power here like Nuland are married to people like the single largest piece-of-shit Neo-con, Robert Kagan, who played an enormous role by actively deceiving the American people pushing us into the Bullshit that we have conducted in the Middle East, does not tend to alleviate their concerns that maybe we have additional objectives beyond just Ukrainian safety.
  19. Shady Ray

    Russia

    I think much of what you are saying is true. And to the extent I disagree, i nevertheless see your position as absolutely reasonable. Yeah, the state of the Bundeswehr is abysmal and truly should be much more of a source of national shame than it is. But hell, not only did Ursula fucking von der Leyen run it even further into the ground (which is an accomplishment unto itself given how bad it was that twit got it) but - even as Germans were calling for her head - Merkel succeeded in having her installed to head the EU, which is perhaps the biggest example of failing upward that I have ever seen...so let no one doubt the amount of control the Germans have over Brussels indirectly. However, I think much of your point operates from the position that Germany is acting in some way contrary to what the post-War system was designed to produce. I think it is correct that the post-war infrastructure (NATO, EU) was designed in part to eliminate Germany’s ability to do anything unilaterally OTHER than to refuse to participate in collective NATO action and snipe from the sidelines when they don’t agree when NATO gets trigger happy. And so this is what they do. When NATO -fueled by French and American geopolitical interests-wanted to set up no-fly zones in Libya and further destabilize an already unstable situation, which was a terrible decision in my opinion, Germany refused to participate and rightly criticized it. When the US ran weapons by the billions of USD into Syria supporting so-called moderate Islamist rebels, Germany refused to allow it to occur with its support or over its soil. So when you say the US expects an acknowledgement that the arrangement has worked out well for Germany, I don’t see how much more emphatic German leaders can be domestically on this subject. They constantly extol the virtue of the alliance and no one but the AfD actively disparages it in any way, but they do openly acknowledge the desire of the German government - and the German people to an overwhelming degree - not to see NATO continue to expand east. Anything more is electorally unacceptable here. This goes back to unification and the understanding with Moscow that NATO expansion would stop at the borders of a reunified Germany. Which, of course, rightly or wrongly was ignored immediately thereafter and continues to be to date. And that is ultimately where the nuance that I refer to comes in. The average American truly believes that NATO is purely defensive. And the average Russian truly believes that it is purely offensive. And in my opinion, both of those opinions are completely naive and overlysimplified; the truth is in the middle and the average German gets this. Because they don’t see the US as an inviolable force for good and they don’t see the Russians as inherently expansionist and aggressive. They see them as acting in their own self-interests and Germans (and Europeans as a whole) simply have no desire to allow Europe to return to a cold-war battleground where it Is dependent on an American foreign policy doctrine that is becoming increasingly incoherent and aggressive. I’ll use Maidan as an example: When the audio tapes of Victoria Nuland and the US ambassador to Ukraine leaked showing then explicitly discussing US plans for Ukraine and it’s direct coordination with Ukrainian opposition as to who was acceptable to the US to govern the country before Yanukovych had even fled, all the US media focused on was her “Fuck the EU” comment. That’s it. And that element of the leak was completely irrelevant. Who cares if Victoria Nuland said “Fuck the EU” on a seemingly secure line. The real issue there was the rest of the content showing that the US was, in fact, inserting itself in / coordinating, planning and guiding a revolution in Ukraine with full knowledge that Ukraine - and more specifically - Crimea, was seen by Moscow to be an existential issue to Russian security. Yet the coverage here was very even-handed and while no one excused the Russian actions there, the general population also didn’t see Ukraine as some type of nascent democratic flower waiting to bloom. They simply saw it as the next theater in which the US and Russia were going to engage in territorial pissings, where intel operations were ongoing by both sides, where empires were jostling for strategic territory, and as such, a theater that needed to be frozen and contained to Ukraine. They were also well aware of the far-right nature of significant swathes of the revolutionary elements within the Ukrainian revolutionary forces and they generally aren’t going to be convinced that anything that goes on over there is cut and dry/right and wrong. So when I say nuanced, that is what I mean, and on issues such as that, I do believe it is much more sophisticated and accurate than the wholesale swallowing of media stenographers’ BS that Ukraine situation consists of “freedom fighters seeking to democratize” narrative so often presented in the US or the “NATO preparing for regime change in Moscow” narrative coming out of Russia. It's similar to the situation in Syria...buncha assholes, so leave 'em be. That's what makes this Ukraine situation so tenuous...in my opinion, it could result in either an entirely new generation of Europeans finding value and security in NATO if Russia is successfully painted to be the unhinged aggressor; but in the alternative, if it is seen by the people to be a byproduct of "empire games" partially exacerbated by the Ukraine and US at our external borders, I think there could be a furious backlash resulting in an expedited exploration of a specifically Euro-centric military force. Zelensky is seen as an incompetent idiot Ukrainian TV star who is essentially the Ukrainian version of Trump, and the US now has to overcome the lack of confidence that its recent foreign policy miscalculations have brought while at the hip of such a questionable talent. But that aside, I think the position that Europe gets some lopsided benefit by having the US act as guarantor of its security is overly simplified. There have been discussions on changing course here and regaining control over Europe's own security obligations and responsibilities; and literally each and every time over the last few years that European leaders have taken even minute steps in discussing a common European military to the exclusion of NATO- as sure as night follows day - the US throws an absolute tantrum. They go on about how it would lead to duplication of efforts and they explicitly attack even the slightest plans to limit European spending to European-headquartered companies in the event such a defense project comes to fruition. And this latter point drives this much more than the American military's concern over inefficient use of resources due to duplication, which is fuuuckin rich. NATO provides an incalculable benefit to the US in the form of billions and billions of dollars in defense contracts, but more importantly, it is the single greatest enabler of power projection into Eurasia and Africa. The US position militarily would be greatly reduced globally if it didn’t have complete and total control of military matters on the European peninsula and the US will take every step under the sun to ensure that it never loses its military primacy here. And fortunately for the US, Europe is insularly focused enough to allow this to remain so long as stupid proxy wars generally stay off the Continent. So of course we can debate whether the Europeans are genuinely interested in such a project (taking Merkel and Macron at their words, they are) or if they could align themselves to the degree required to formulate a common EU military, but ultimately, that would require an initial first step and every time that first step is made, the US pulls every lever of power it has within Europe to shut it down before any momentum gains.
  20. Shady Ray

    Russia

    Oh, definitely. There are incidents like the Lisa affair which are seen to be somewhat minor, but ultimately, that (and some others like it) was a blip on the media landscape...the mobilization of a few thousand poor Russian Germans in the east to bitch and moan over a couple of days about migrants tends not to impact the collective psyche to the degree required to alter perception generally. I remember media coverage on that lasted a couple of days and was buried under other matters. Anyone not affiliated with the AfD (or even further to the right) saw that for what it was immediately and it’s impact was negligible (if any at all) on German domestic affairs. And, in the grand scheme of the chaos that was the migrant crisis in 2015-16, it was even less significant. Poor, poorly-integrated German Russians in the east hating freshly-arrived brown people isn’t particularly a new idea to the masses here. The other point there is that the average German’s understanding of east-west geopolitics is much more nuanced than it is in middle-America or Nizhny Novgorod. Neither side is seen as inherently good or bad; they are seen to simply act in their own political interests, some of which are justified and some of which are not. And the Lisa situation was openly acknowledged on our news programming as being directly tied to Russia’s accusation that Germany’s leadership (seemingly reluctantly) was placating the US by extending sanctions, even over its own instincts. Basically an attempt at a muscle-flex a la Erdogan with his legitimately influential pull over large swathes of Turks in Germany. It was seen as a shot across the bow and frankly, plenty here were sympathetic to the position that Ukraine was none of Germany’s business and was at its inception an issue relating to Russian-Ukrainian beef which then morphed into a proxy battlefield for NATO expansion, which has no traction here, particularly with respect to Ukraine. Hell, roughly half of Germans don’t even support intervening military in defense of another NATO ally, so no one is going to justify doing so for non-member Ukraine. Compare that to what is seen by most Germans as a years-long coordinated campaign by the US to leverage German leadership to act in a way that is seen (rightly or wrongly, doesn't matter) as detrimental to their own domestic population in thwarting a popular energy project (which is the highest-profile foreign policy project going) and and its understandable why the US is perceived as far more brutish in its meddling in internal German affairs. The only way to change this is to change the perception of cost-benefit to the people, and this message is really only being pushed by American's or those seen to be in bed with the US. And unfortunately, as discussed earlier, the American imprimatur doesn't have the cache that it used to. At the same time, everyone knows that “Gazprom Gerhardt” Schroeder and Putin were (and remain) bosom buddies and that it was their relationship while he was Chancellor that drove NS2’s inception. But again, this is realpolitik/geo-economics and no one really cares that it arose out of less than pure ideals. It’s seen as a welcomed, large-scale infrastructure improvement, which increases reliability and cuts out the need to use leaky, inefficient Ukrainian pipelines...and nothing gets German dicks hard like shiny, new, large-scale infrastructure upgrades. So it’s as simple as that to the average German...reliable/known partner provides reliable/known product via reliable/known method via reliable/known route. But yeah, I totally agree that there are plenty of big fish here who do - and would continue to - benefit from continued Russian-German economic integration. And they have been very effective in spinning this continued cooperation as beneficial to Germany as a whole. No doubt about that.
  21. Shady Ray

    Russia

    I will do #2 first, as I think I may have fucked up by not clearly defining "Union" here. When I say "Union", I mean the Christian Democratic Union and their sister Bavarian party, the Christian Social Union, which are referred to at the Union within German politics. So basically the center-right party, which has been in power since Merkel beat Gerhardt Schroeder in 2005. Greens aren't a thorn for further EU integration...they love that shit. I will give you my best stab with respect to #1: The Germans - and by that I mean both German politicians, as well as German populace at large - don't see Russia nearly as spooky as the Americans and former Eastern Europeans do. And of course with respect to East/Central Europe, that is understandable. No one sees Putin as some type of kind, neighborly fellow, but he is certainly seen as predictable and a rational actor. And I think the "rational actor" element is frequently overlooked, but shouldn't be underestimated when it comes to this. Germans have been buying gas from the Russians since the days of the USSR, and the US - stretching back to Reagan - has been unhappy about it. The Soviets were seen here as far more expansionary than Putin's Russia and at some point America's continuous drum-beat of "Russian dependency" has not played out as predicted. At least not yet, and most Germans doubt it ever will. You can read press from the 80s and it is the exact same language as the Germans hear today about getting into bed with Putin. Germans have been in bed with Russia economically for decades...nothing is going to change that. Are they a huge market for Germany? No, but generally speaking, Germany views Russia as important and worthy of an even-handed posture geopolitically speaking. Germans also don't care much about anything to the east of Dresden and they certainly don't give a fuck about anything to the east of Prague. Once you hit Poland's or Slovakia's eastern front, that shit is all Russian to the average German. Russian aggression in Crimea? Doesn't even register here. The situation in Ukraine is certainly not seen as some type of struggle for freedom and democracy, but rather just a forum for what many, many Germans view as simply one set of fascistic Slavs wearing Blue and Yellow badges fighting another set of autocratic-backed Slavs wearing a white, blue and red tricolor in some area that not one German gives a flying fuck about. I can't imagine a German that would view anything going over there in Ukraine or Georgia as worthy of one shittily-trained Bundeswehr soldier acting at NATO's behest, and the average German DEFINITELY does not want Ukraine in the EU...under ANY circumstance. Basically, I think the German's general chauvinism towards Slavs is still a form of xenophobia that is seen as tolerable so long as it is subtle, and it plays out in the form of general apathy regarding the issue of whether some slavic country is bypassed and deprived of transit fees at the expense of German direct access to Russian energy plugged in at Meck-Pom. Russia is an important regional power and has been forever...and one of the things that I just never realized before moving here is just how familiar the two countries are with each other. Russians are here. Everywhere. Yes, they are often seen as street thugs and pimps and other nefarious elements, but there is a familiarity, and familiarity tends to decrease fear of a specific "other". It is also worth pointing out - and don't shoot the messenger - that Germans do not generally care for the US in the way they did prior to 2000 or so. George W. Bush's legacy in the realm of German geopolitical affairs is that he tarred the U.S. as hyper-aggressive and, unfortunately, very unpredictable...not nearly as rational of an actor as Russia. Iraq did major damage to our image as trustworthy or reliable; and then the steady frolics and detours of Libya, Syria, Yemen in a big way...the eternal occupation of a failed state in Afghanistan, the unilateral termination of the Iran deal, etc. have only served to reinforce the opinion of John Q. Kraut that the U.S. gets itself into unjust and unnecessary foreign entanglements - regardless of R or D behind the name - and then expects German support under the banner of NATO. I am not saying that they are correct in viewing us this way, but it has to be seen as at least reasonable given our track record the past 20 years. While the US news is filled with domestic drama day in and out, our nightly news is foreign affairs, foreign affairs, foreign affairs. And our dirty deeds are not buried under who is fucking who or who is pissing in what Target bathroom. Meanwhile, as far as Germans are concerned...Russia since 2000 has been, well, crickets. Yes, they are brutal and corrupt internally to their people and they have had some ugly situations on their borders (or, in the case of Syria, an ugly situation in an area of long-held interest), but they don't sew chaos in far flung regions of the world and they certainly don't involve themselves in the internal affairs of Germany. I hear it all the time with colleagues..."Well yeah, they kill their dissidents in Moscow while your lot just carpet bombs swathes of innocents everywhere else." We have lost the authority of righteousness in the eyes of many in the West and unfortunately that creates apathy in Deutschland, the O.G. home of nihilism.
  22. Shady Ray

    Russia

    I imagine part of this may be the Union's (and the SPD minister-president in Meck Pom) attempt at a brushback pitch to back the US off the whole Nord Stream 2 pressure campaign that they have been ramping up lately. NS2 is very important to the Union (and obviously to Meck Pom generally given the NS2's landfall station is there), and it is still popular with most Germans. Blinken's statement that the US was going to sanction Germany if NS2 was completed didn't sit well whatsoever with the average Union/SPD voter and this may be the Union's attempt to use whatever leverage they have by at least threatening to give Sputnik a veneer of legitimacy in Europe. Of course, it is an election year here and both NS2 and our lagging vaccine rollout are huge, huge issues. The future of the chancellorship completely depends on how a party approaches these two things, and they are very much intertwined in the German's self worldview at the moment. The race is tightening considerably and there is a real risk that the Union loses its control over the country via a variety of potential coalitions if the Greens continue to rise. The problems with the rollout have become an embarrassment to a country that prided itself on its effective discipline early on re lockdowns and masks, etc. The bumbling response by the government by outsourcing procurement to Ursula fucking Von der Leyen in Brussels, as well as scandals involving the Union and mask procurement deals with some state governments, has really embarrassed the average German. Taking orders from the US via threat of sanctions on a matter of what is perceived as strictly a matter of energy policy/independence would be an additional blow to the collective ego. I think the leaders in the race to run the country feel that they must show something that they can lead on. And it is worth noting...there is nothing-absolutely nothing - that strikes to the core of the German ego than watching the Brits perform better in ANYTHING. Given that they are damn near at herd immunity, ambitious pols can read the writing on the wall.
  23. Shady Ray

    Russia

    Curious to see how this impacts us here in Bavaria. Our governor, Markus Söder, announced yesterday that he has signed an MOU with Russia for 2.5m doses of Sputnik, all of which are to be produced here in the state. Söder is currently one of - if not the - favorites to replace Merkel in the fall and he does nothing without calculation. Mecklenburg-West Pom followed Bavaria shortly thereafter and Thuringia said they would do the same today. And now the EU has said that they will not sign an agreement with Russia for Sputnik, so Germany's Federal Health Minister said that if the EU doesn't do it, then Germany will go it alone with Russia* and pursue its own approvals and contracts. Momentum within Europe over the past three days has been decidedly pro-Sputnik, so I'd imagine there are people in Berlin who are going to be looking into this story very closely. *cue Operation Barbarossa jokes
  24. Basically, it's a strip of land in Moldova on the Ukrainian border that is essentially lawless. What law they do have is enforced by Russian-loyalists and the region is one of the major hubs of all things illicit in Europe. Russian troops that were there during the Soviet days just never left and I doubt anything will change anytime soon on that front. Guns, human trafficking, drugs, knock-off Adidas track suits...you name it, they are all run through Transnistria, and coincidentally, transactions of such a nature will also be brokered by men in knock-off Adidas track suits. Its a real gem of Europe.
  25. Why do you hate America? Putin is a shitbird thug. We interfere in ways we would never accept if done to us. Always has been, always will be. News at 11.
×
×
  • Create New...