Yup, he set relations with Iran back 2 decades, when he took office they had a moderate in office and were trying to thaw them.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
Trump winning is the bigger WTF. Trump not doing anything about it is normal since they did what they could to help him.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
Ultimately I think both are justifiable but I can't quite put them in the unavoidable category for sure.
Well, at least Afghanistan. Saddam was probably not open to negotiating without severe harm in Kuwait in the mean time, so that's a good point.
But Nazi Germany is certainly an evil that wasn't open to negotiation. Hitler was a comic book villain with how determined he was.
BronsonLee
Member
WAIT IS SPICER BACK
Would be morally A-OK tbh if we were living in a world where the USSR lived up to its ideals. Wouldn't work out though with all those nukes.
Yes? I'd rather not go back to that time?
AntraxSuicide
Banned
So Russia engages in multiple cyber attacks against the US declaring a cyberwar. This isn't that big of a deal because cyberwarfare isn't like real war and thus doesn't require any kind of retaliation. However, the US can't engage in cyber attacks against Russia because that would mean we'd have to face consequences for our actions. Consequences that Russia doesn't have to face because cyberwarfare isn't a big deal.
Am I getting this right?
Am I getting this right?
Kid Kamikaze10
Member
Beer Monkey
Member
Russia's co-opting of Trump to subvert our democracy and institutions is straight out of their playbook aka 'Foundations of Geopolitics'. It's all about destabilizing the west so that they can't effectively stop Putin from accumulating power, and he will kill to do it.
Your plan would be to let them do it?
Russia will gladly commit genocide to annex Ukraine if that's what it takes to claim it. You'd be OK with that?
You know we fucked up staying out of WWII until Pearl Harbor happened, right?
Frank the Great
Banned
Economic sanctions, isolation by international community. There needs to be consequences, but simply launching a cyber counterattack is not a good solution.
It's also not workable. I mean, what kind of counter cyber attack would it be? It sounds pedantic but it's true that two wrongs do not make a right, and the USA should always hold the moral high ground. We lose it the second we launch a cyber attack.
Also I doubt a counter cyber attack would even be an effective deterrent. Again, what would it look like? What would be the purpose? It would be lame compared to what they did to us.
BlastProcessing
Member
Beer Monkey
Member
Appease, basically.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Roland_Gunner
Member
So our policy should be to oppose democratically elected governments like those in the Ukraine in favor of puppets installed by Putin? How could that go wrong?
Can a self-described lefty help me understand something?
How do you reconcile the belief that the government should act as an actor, strengthen the welfare state, control its industries, etc. with the idea that the state also should not have agency or sovereignty? Wouldn't you, by virtue of ceding so much power to the state, by definition be granting it authority on the international stage as well?
This is what I find puzzling about the Greenwald-ian strain of leftist politics which, foreign policy-wise, seem to be anti-state more than anything. The state does not have the authority to retaliate, etc. etc.
Aren't these things fundamentally at tension with one another?
I agree with this.
What is the goal that this would achieve?
How do you reconcile the belief that the government should act as an actor, strengthen the welfare state, control its industries, etc. with the idea that the state also should not have agency or sovereignty? Wouldn't you, by virtue of ceding so much power to the state, by definition be granting it authority on the international stage as well?
This is what I find puzzling about the Greenwald-ian strain of leftist politics which, foreign policy-wise, seem to be anti-state more than anything. The state does not have the authority to retaliate, etc. etc.
Aren't these things fundamentally at tension with one another?
I agree with this.
What is the goal that this would achieve?
I think we're all pacifists in the realm of ideal theory, but hostile powers actually exist and need to be negotiated. You can do that with hard power or soft power, but if you're interested in maintaining your own power, you need to be willing to defend it.
Fenderputty
Banned
I feel like I have a 50/50 shot at entering this thread and reading about PBY bitching about Russia.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
This is insane. There would be no end to Russian encroachment.
Most cyber attacks are aimed at compromising systems which leads to expensive and slow upgrades to those compromised systems. It's equivalent to bombing empty buildings and structures.
And like I mentioned above, economic sanctions can push Putin into aggression. He's done it before and would do it again.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Presumably a counter cyberattack against their cyberwarfare capabilities--you know, hindering their ability to fuck with us--would be productive.
Obviously, "look we can fuck with your elections too" wouldn't be a good cyberattack angle to take.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
WE'RE DOING BIG THINGS FOR MADE IN AMERICA WEEK
Frank the Great
Banned
But they'll just launch more cyber attacks against us in that scenario. Cyber attacks are criminal acts. The exact moment we launch a counter cyber attack, we are inviting retaliation and endless escalation. There's no winning a cyber war.
We need the moral high ground here and international cooperation to punish Russia with soft power. It's the only way. If Putin gets aggressive, we can deal with it then separately, as we always do.
Poodlestrike
Banned
The thing about Russia is that it's currently being run by Putin. Putin is... well, not to put too fine a point on it, but he's kind of a sociopath with a twisted zero-sum view of the world. He believes that for Russia to succeed, somebody else (the West generally, America specifically) MUST fail, and also, the inverse--that if the West falters, then Russia must therefore be succeeding. Detente does nothing for this mindset because they view overtures at peace as a sign of weakness.
Also the phrase "stop trying to overthrow the governments of their friends" gets a strong sideye from me due to the similarity to the classic "NATO encroachment" bullshit the Kremlin likes to spread.
I mean, they're ALREADY fucking with their elections. There's... not a lot of room there.
Also the phrase "stop trying to overthrow the governments of their friends" gets a strong sideye from me due to the similarity to the classic "NATO encroachment" bullshit the Kremlin likes to spread.
I mean, they're ALREADY fucking with their elections. There's... not a lot of room there.
IggyChooChoo
Member
Hahahaha hacking nuclear plants, how comical!
AntraxSuicide
Banned
To be clear, as I've mentioned before, I'm not really into the idea of sovereignty of nations. So my response to Russian election meddling is less about them not respecting our sovereignty and more about trying to remove the possibility of future unfair elections. If Russia was a power willing to negotiate and wasn't committing human rights violations every day, then I'd back that 100%. But it's immoral to me to treat them like Germany in a trade negotiation or something. They're not the same.
Trusting a country that's regularly assassinating its own people and is currently committing genocide in Chechnya- a very bad idea.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Would need to pass a filibuster.
Have you met Mitch McConnell?
AntraxSuicide
Banned
They're already aggressive. That's why they've conquered territory and hacked a foreign power.
And more cyber measures can limit their attempts in the future.
Mitch doesn't want to end the filibuster. It's why he's been really stretching the reconciliation rules.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Aggressive climate action would end Putin's rule and life most likely.
Avoiding nuclear war. The Russian government would be substantially less bellicose if the US toned down its own aggression and imperialism. Ceasing our regime-change operations in states like Syria, Venezuela, and Iran (and Russia itself!) would give Russia far less cause to seek their influence by force.
Putin looms over Russia on two great stilts: oil sales and popular resentment of the West. While market forces and climate change are already starting to shake one of those pillars, Russians aren't going to stop loving Putin until Western governments stop fucking them over.
Aaron Strife
Banned
If he was willing to kill the filibuster he would have done it for healthcare rather than going through this song-and-dance with reconciliation.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
You mean regarding how heavily they rely on oil?
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
>Putin gets Americans to bend the knee.
>Russians, living in hell and craving the past of importance, decide to turn against Putin.
Yeah, this is terrible psychological analysis.
I mean, yes, they're a petrol state.
Poodlestrike
Banned
It might not even be that uncommon, but they're usually not nuclear-armed dictatorships. It complicates things.
Yup yup yup.
Ultimately, if it weren't for the fact that Trump & co keep refusing to say one bad word about Putin I'd almost believe that he really DOES just like him that much. They're basically the same person in a lot of ways, and modern Russia is basically the Republicans' ideal nation-state. The refusal to throw 'em under the bus for political gain gives up the ghost, though.
I think you're misunderstanding what I was trying to say -- that some have become so afraid of Russia, they'd rather not respond to Russia's actions at all. That's dangerous when you're dealing with someone like Putin.
He'd need the same 50 votes that he doesn't have now.
Is that it? That's a pretty low bar.
also what evidence is there that Russians love Putin?
Abandoning regime change operations isn't "bending the knee". It's decent human behavior.
In the immediate future, the US government should diplomatically condemn electoral meddling while ceasing its identical behavior in other nations. Sanctions are a no-go because they only impoverish everyday Russians.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked