Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Lord Ratner]

3 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

Mexico is not sanctioning Russia…should we end all economic activities with Mexico?

 

First off, they don't have to sanction them, merely comply with the sanctions. 

 

But no, the second order sanctions would not have to be punitive (such as seizures or exclusion from SWIFT). But immediate suspension of trade agreements, preferable tax treatment, termination of joint military exercises. It's not particularly hard to exert pressure. We did it with the European countries with the Iranian sanctions, much to the dismay of France and Germany. We're not going to take your wealth (in your example), but your wealth creation through interaction with the United States will suffer.

 

We are the big kid on the block. If you want to live under our security umbrella, you don't get to play with the villains. And as before, the direct violation of national sovereignty, genocide, or nuclear use are clear definitions of villainous activity.

[HeloDude]

9 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

First off, they don't have to sanction them, merely comply with the sanctions. 

What does “merely comply with them” mean, exactly?  Mexico is still ops normal economically with Russia, are they not?  

[Lord Ratner]

5 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

What does “merely comply with them” mean, exactly?  Mexico is still ops normal economically with Russia, are they not?  

The US can initiate sanctions and demand compliance from other nations. Reference Iran.

 

So in the case of Mexico, should they choose to go their own way, then we take another look at NAFTA, or maybe cut off personal bank wire service between the US and Mexico. Not a difficult country to pressure.

 

Is it the concept I'm not communicating well, or merely the exact detail? Either of us could come up with many options using examples from the past. 

 

I'm not sure how them being ops normal with Russia right now is relevant. I'm not the president, so obviously they aren't doing what *I* would do.

[HeloDude]

3 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

The US can initiate sanctions and demand compliance from other nations. Reference Iran.

 

So in the case of Mexico, should they choose to go their own way, then we take another look at NAFTA, or maybe cut off personal bank wire service between the US and Mexico. Not a difficult country to pressure.

 

Is it the concept I'm not communicating well, or merely the exact detail? Either of us could come up with many options using examples from the past. 

 

I'm not sure how them being ops normal with Russia right now is relevant. I'm not the president, so obviously they aren't doing what *I* would do.

So why do you think Biden is not threatening Mexico economically to pressure them to as you suggest?  Also, have you personally stopped purchasing items from Mexico?  Or is it the same with you enjoying buying items from China?  

You’re talking a big game, but when it comes to you personally making sacrifices, I’m not seeing it.  

[Bender]

So why do you think Biden is not threatening Mexico economically to pressure them to as you suggest?  Also, have you personally stopped purchasing items from Mexico?  Or is it the same with you enjoying buying items from China?  
You’re talking a big game, but when it comes to you personally making sacrifices, I’m not seeing it.  

I’d like to second that foreign policy and personal behavior are two distinctly different things. Not sure why we’re grabbing on to the personal jab there…my personal sacrifices aren’t going to slow Russia’s roll down the road to the capital.

The initial question is pretty legit. So why not…I have my answers, but Lord Ratner is well into it at this point and I’d love to hear it.

~Bendy




Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[Lord Ratner]

19 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

So why do you think Biden is not threatening Mexico economically to pressure them to as you suggest?  Also, have you personally stopped purchasing items from Mexico?  Or is it the same with you enjoying buying items from China?  

You’re talking a big game, but when it comes to you personally making sacrifices, I’m not seeing it.  

You asked what I would do, not what I think Biden is doing. Focus.

 

I literally went to a home builders conference with a goal of finding manufacturers from countries other than China. Of note, a window manufacturer in Poland with great prices. Not China great, but still good. 

 

One of the features of collective action (government) is that it promotes a sense of fairness, critical in human systems, through uniform enforcement of the collective will. How many people would pay taxes if they weren't mandatory? Yet we all agree there needs to be some revenue source for the government. 

 

Do you avoid bridges and roads that were paid for by legislation you disagree with? I disagree with lower taxes for capital gains, and would vote to abolish them. But I'm not going to disadvantage my family when the correct mechanism is voting and communicating. Ironically, I will disadvantage my family to a point, which I do with more expensive purchases from non-China sources. But maximalist arguments are rarely valid. You're making a silly point, which is out of character.

[HeloDude]

11 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

You asked what I would do, not what I think Biden is doing. Focus.

 

I literally went to a home builders conference with a goal of finding manufacturers from countries other than China. Of note, a window manufacturer in Poland with great prices. Not China great, but still good. 

 

One of the features of collective action (government) is that it promotes a sense of fairness, critical in human systems, through uniform enforcement of the collective will. How many people would pay taxes if they weren't mandatory? Yet we all agree there needs to be some revenue source for the government. 

 

Do you avoid bridges and roads that were paid for by legislation you disagree with? I disagree with lower taxes for capital gains, and would vote to abolish them. But I'm not going to disadvantage my family when the correct mechanism is voting and communicating. Ironically, I will disadvantage my family to a point, which I do with more expensive purchases from non-China sources. But maximalist arguments are rarely valid. You're making a silly point, which is out of character.

I’m not the one telling people that their morals are lacking if they don’t support action against Russia for invading Ukraine.  So if you’re going to ask where my personal lines are then I’m going to do the same to you.  The difference is that I don’t care whether or not you support action against X country but apparently you care if I don’t support said actions.  
 

So I ask you to lead by example—be the change that you want to see happen.  If you’re not voluntarily willing to sacrifice what you want the government to force us all to sacrifice, then your argument holds zero weight.

[Danger41]

17 hours ago, goingkinetic said:

Flea what are your quals? Let me guess you washed out of pilot training and now teach sos. You are so smart.

 

Not that I want to engage with you but whenever I hear this type of attack I tell people to look up Chesty Puller and Tom Norris. Couple dudes that did alright even though they couldn’t hack it in pilot training.

[O Face]

On 3/4/2022 at 8:31 PM, FLEA said:

Back your claims, or get off the adult table. I'm done argueing. You have offered nothing to support your claims. I literally regurgitated the entire Soviet policy textbook answer on why they see the west as the aggressive one on here and all you offered was "your insane to believe that." But you have offered nothing otherwise. Back your claims, or go eat your chicken nuggets. If you don't want to be a big kid in these decisions, that's fine. But don't sit there and pout when people who spend a lot of time on this stuff and have arguments that actually have merit disagree with you. Go back to your flying planes and let people who are focused on avoiding nuclear miscalculation figure this out for you. 

Have you ever stopped sniffing these “academics” seat cushions long enough to consider the fact that the only reason Russia is a nuclear threat today is because some treasonous academic war-winners sold our nuclear secrets to Russia in the first place?  

Let me guess…I’m only viewing through my  ‘Merica lens, and If I put down my chicken nuggets and macaroni I would become enlightened enough to understand that Rosenberg, Fuchs, and Hall were actually really cool bros. 
 

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, O Face said:

Have you ever stopped sniffing these “academics” seat cushions long enough to consider the fact that the only reason Russia is a nuclear threat today is because some treasonous academic war-winners sold our nuclear secrets to Russia in the first place?  

Let me guess…I’m only viewing through my  ‘Merica lens, and If I put down my chicken nuggets and macaroni I would become enlightened enough to understand that Rosenberg, Fuchs, and Hall were actually really cool bros. 
 

I mean.... So what? Because a few dudes were assholes all academics were ass holes? Yeah man, there's bad people out there. Do you think your Intel shop is trash because Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden? You aren't really making a point here. There's just garbage people in the world. I mean should I pin the China's rise on pilots because Shapour Moinian sold secrets to a Chinese intelligence asset? Surely you don't believe that? 

[hockeydork]

13 hours ago, HeloDude said:

I’m not the one telling people that their morals are lacking if they don’t support action against Russia for invading Ukraine.  So if you’re going to ask where my personal lines are then I’m going to do the same to you.  The difference is that I don’t care whether or not you support action against X country but apparently you care if I don’t support said actions.  
 

So I ask you to lead by example—be the change that you want to see happen.  If you’re not voluntarily willing to sacrifice what you want the government to force us all to sacrifice, then your argument holds zero weight.

The individual (consumer) only has power up until a certain point. You could want to buy an American computer all you want, but if none are manufactured, you're going to have to buy what's available. This is what ratner is getting at. 

I went through this a few years ago when Craftsman stopped making American tools. I bought as many USA ones I could find before they went to asia. I did find another manufacturer, SK, which is USA, they are more expensive but I pay it anyways. But if SK didn't exist, I'd be SOL unless the government did something to collectively force US manufacturing of tools. 

What a lot of people fail to forget is that the US makes a lot of money off selling things to China. Ever seen how popular Buick is over there? Trade is good economically for both countries. However as we are seeing, those benefits may be short term if the state you are trading with turns beligerent.

Imagine you had a neighbor you hated because he beat his wife, but he really needs to borrow your pressure washer, and you really need to borrow his weed wacker. What do you do? You could both go buy your own additional weed wacker and pressure washer. That'll be bad for both of you economically, but than youd be free to tell him to stop beating his wife. Pros & cons to both arguments. 

[ClearedHot]

Uber left wing "journalist" Fareed Zakaria just published his "take" on CNN...on how to deal with the Ukrainian situation - "The U.S. should immediately pump all the oil it can.  It should export as much natural gas as possible (including replacing all coal plants with natural gas).  We should remove all sanctions from Venezuela and Iran and let them pump the market full of their oil"  Everyone is worried about Putin being in a corner, to me it looks like Biden is in a corner with AOC and the Green New Deal Squad.

[goingkinetic]

13 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Not that I want to engage with you but whenever I hear this type of attack I tell people to look up Chesty Puller and Tom Norris. Couple dudes that did alright even though they couldn’t hack it in pilot training.

Apparently, I’m good at derailing threads. Again I poorly communicated my point via a personal attack, and that was wrong. I would happily buy flea or any who may not agree with me a beer. The US needs to be able to discuss differences without automatically assuming the other side is dumb or a Russian Plant.

The air force in the 40’s, 50s and 60s was run by men with vast combat experience. Somewhere in there the notion that academics can solve everything with missiles became prevalent. We saw how that worked out. The hit rate of the Aim-7 in Vietnam was in the single digit percentiles. How was McNamara’s F-111. There is an F in front of it because it was supposed to do air to air. To sum it up, common sense combat experience is extremely valuable and can’t be bought via a degree.

And no, I don’t need the standard O-6 speech of how would I fly my jet without AFE. Well, I’d probably inspect my own gear, but I sure as hell need MX and LRO. Finance questionable. Our recent awards ceremony only had one ops winner. We as a whole have lost sight in the value of guys hacking the mish. In my view it’s due to 60 years of domination.

[HeloDude]

50 minutes ago, hockeydork said:

The individual (consumer) only has power up until a certain point. You could want to buy an American computer all you want, but if none are manufactured, you're going to have to buy what's available. This is what ratner is getting at. 

I went through this a few years ago when Craftsman stopped making American tools. I bought as many USA ones I could find before they went to asia. I did find another manufacturer, SK, which is USA, they are more expensive but I pay it anyways. But if SK didn't exist, I'd be SOL unless the government did something to collectively force US manufacturing of tools. 

What a lot of people fail to forget is that the US makes a lot of money off selling things to China. Ever seen how popular Buick is over there? Trade is good economically for both countries. However as we are seeing, those benefits may be short term if the state you are trading with turns beligerent.

Imagine you had a neighbor you hated because he beat his wife, but he really needs to borrow your pressure washer, and you really need to borrow his weed wacker. What do you do? You could both go buy your own additional weed wacker and pressure washer. That'll be bad for both of you economically, but than youd be free to tell him to stop beating his wife. Pros & cons to both arguments. 

If that’s what you got out of my original post, then I have to explain it better…here it goes:

If Ratner is going to say that his morality is superior to others because he is wants the US to do X to Russia and wants the American people to sacrifice Y due to economic sanctions (when others like me don’t desire these options), then I expect him to voluntarily sacrifice more than what is a minor inconvenience in his daily life.  Ratner says that we should stop doing business with countries (ie Mexico) who are still ops normal with Russia and yet Ratner himself is not willing to make such personal sacrifices on his own.  You can live a life in the US without ever purchasing anything from Mexico.

If you disagree, then that’s fine…but this is the equivalent to those who want AR-15s banned in the US but is willing to get one themselves and/or hire someone with an AR-15 to provide their private security.  Another example are those who want SUVs using traditional gas engines banned, but who also continues to use them until there is such a ban.

If Ratner wants to play the “moral superiority” game, then he has to be willing to accept the fact that he picks and chooses as well, and thus is not better than anyone else.

[goingkinetic]

1 minute ago, HeloDude said:

If that’s what you got out of my original post, then I have to explain it better…here it goes:

If Ratner is going to say that his morality is superior to others because he is wants the US to do X to Russia and wants the American people to sacrifice Y due to economic sanctions (when others like me don’t desire these options), then I expect him to voluntarily sacrifice more than what is a minor inconvenience in his daily life.  Ratner says that we should stop doing business with countries (ie Mexico) who are still ops normal with Russia and yet Ratner himself is not willing to make such personal sacrifices on his own.  You can live a life in the US without ever purchasing anything from Mexico.

If you disagree, then that’s fine…but this is the equivalent to those who want AR-15s banned in the US but is willing to get one themselves and/or hire someone with an AR-15 to provide their private security.  Another example are those who want SUVs using traditional gas engines banned, but who also continues to use them until there is such a ban.

If Ratner wants to play the “moral superiority” game, then he has to be willing to accept the fact that he picks and chooses as well, and thus is not better than anyone else.

Aushwitz is morally wrong regardless of your moral compass.  True evil should be abhorrent to everyone.

[Lord Ratner]

2 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

yet Ratner himself is not willing to make such personal sacrifices on his own.

You keep saying that, yet I have and do regularly. But as pointed out, you can't buy things with chips in them that don't come from China. Are you just not reading the posts?

 

4 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

If Ratner is going to say that his morality is superior to others

You should go back and read the entire post. "We aren't there yet."

[Lord Ratner]

19 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

At a certain point, when you tolerate evil that you have the capacity to impede, you are being immoral yourself. We aren't there yet, but we are getting closer.

For ease of reference

[HeloDude]

16 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

You keep saying that, yet I have and do regularly. But as pointed out, you can't buy things with chips in them that don't come from China. Are you just not reading the posts?

 

You should go back and read the entire post. "We aren't there yet."

Ohhhhh…”we’re not there yet”.  Translation—you’re not willing to sacrifice more “yet”.  But you’re willing to call out others for their lack of morality if they don’t want to sacrifice what you’re willing to do so now. 

Sorry dude…you literally brought morality into this argument of what someone is willing to do vs not do, not me.  You also said we should not do business with those countries who do business with Russia…and yet you voluntarily engage in business with those countries.  I don’t care whether someone buys Russian vodka or not.   

And as for not wanting to buy chips made in China, are you saying you can’t live a life in the US without buying such items?  Or just that the hardship would be too uncomfortable for you/your family to bear?  What are you going to do when China invades Taiwan?

You’re free to walk back your original morality argument if you’d like…

[HeloDude]

23 minutes ago, goingkinetic said:

Aushwitz is morally wrong regardless of your moral compass.  True evil should be abhorrent to everyone.

If Russia invading Ukraine is the equivalent to Auschwitz, then why hasn’t Europe went to war with Russia to stop them?  Or were you just bringing up Auschwitz as an example of an atrocity that has nothing to do with what is going on currently in Eastern Europe?  I agree Auschwitz was horrendous, but likewise so was the Armenian genocide, Rwanda, slavery in the US, on and on.  I guess we should thank the Soviets and Stalin for liberating those death camps and doing the brunt of ending WW2 in Europe?  And as for the atrocities committed in the USSR…
 

I definitely don’t like what Russia is doing and I think Putin is a bad dude…but I think Xi in China is a bad dude, and I don’t like what they do either.  When China invades Taiwan I won’t like that either…but I won’t be calling for ending all economic activities with China.  Sorry man, but that’s just where I’m at.  We do business with a lot of countries with corrupt governments and that don’t really protect freedom.  Ever been deployed to the Middle East?

What I would like to think the majority of us on here agree on is that the US should severely cut regulations that hamper business (oil, manufacturing, etc) in the US.  If one good thing has come out of this horrible situation is that it has put the pro-big government regulation types on defense, especially the environmental leftists who the Dems can’t seem to upset.  
 

But just like Covid, when things start going worse for politicians in the US due to unpopular policies, they’ll quickly pivot away and find a new issue.  Politicians aren’t nearly as pro-Ukraine as they are anti-Russia, and when Americans get really upset with negative impacts here at home, the politicians will adjust.  This is why Biden won’t cut off the oil…it’s all political theater.  

[hockeydork]

Wtf are we even arguing about anymore? Everyone has a subjective opinion of how much they care about the current situation. About any situation. 

However society is a collection of all of these subjective opinions, and society moves as on the majority of those opinions, or at least it's supposed to.

Helodude you are free to not care about sanctioning Russia, buying Russian oil vodka, etc. But the vast majority of us on here do care. F*ck Putin, I dont care if gas goes to 6 a gallon. Go carpool.

[Lord Ratner]

20 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

Ohhhhh…”we’re not there yet”.  Translation—you’re not willing to sacrifice more “yet”.  But you’re willing to call out others for their lack of morality if they don’t want to sacrifice what you’re willing to do so now. 

Sorry dude…you literally brought morality into this argument of what someone is willing to do vs not do, not me.  You also said we should not do business with those countries who do business with Russia…and yet you voluntarily engage in business with those countries.  I don’t care whether someone buys Russian vodka or not.   

And as for not wanting to buy chips made in China, are you saying you can’t live a life in the US without buying such items?  Or just that the hardship would be too uncomfortable for you/your family to bear?  What are you going to do when China invades Taiwan?

You’re free to walk back your original morality argument if you’d like…

Don't misunderstand me, I think you're wrong, still and going forward.

 

But you seem incapable of understanding nuance, if anything at all, so I don't see much of a point continuing. Your individual purchasing vs foreign policy arguments are now bordering on pathetic. You're either too emotional to engage usefully in the conversation, or intentionally constructing ridiculous arguments to cover for a lack of solid footing. Either way, it's boring.

 

If literally quoting what I said in the past is "walking it back" then I'm not sure you understand how conversations work in the first place... I'll try typing slower.

 

Here's the "if" statement:

40 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

when you tolerate evil that you have the capacity to impede

 

Here's the "then" statement:

39 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

you are being immoral yourself

And here are the *two* qualifying statements that indicate I, the person with an opinion on an opinion board, don't think we/you/people who want inaction are being immoral under the present circumstances.

41 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

At a certain point

 

42 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

We aren't there yet

Finally, this part of the sentence indicates that if things get worse and you maintain a position of "not my problem, let them die," then I will absolutely consider your preferred policy to be immoral: 

47 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

but we are getting closer.

 

If your skin is so thin that you can't handle the idea that you might be holding an immoral position or doing an immoral thing, which *every single one of us* does regularly, and hopefully we all struggle to do better through conversations and experience, just let me know and I'll stop burdening you with the unspeakable pain I've be haphazardly administering.

[fire4effect]

Good breakdown by Ward Carroll on No Fly Zones. Apologies if it's already been posted. 

 

[fire4effect]

And in a moment of levity sometimes we forget to get away from the emotion and remember it really is about the nail.

 

[HeloDude]

11 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Finally, this part of the sentence indicates that if things get worse and you maintain a position of "not my problem, let them die," then I will absolutely consider your preferred policy to be immoral: 

If your skin is so thin that you can't handle the idea that you might be holding an immoral position or doing an immoral thing, which *every single one of us* does regularly, and hopefully we all struggle to do better through conversations and experience, just let me know and I'll stop burdening you with the unspeakable pain I've be haphazardly administering.

Spin it however you need to man.  If you think I’m immoral for not wanting the US to get involved with a war on the other side of the globe, then so be it. 

[HeloDude]

18 minutes ago, hockeydork said:

Helodude you are free to not care about sanctioning Russia, buying Russian oil vodka, etc. But the vast majority of us on here do care. F*ck Putin, I dont care if gas goes to 6 a gallon. Go carpool.

Give it a little time man. I remember when the vast majority were for invading Iraq, even after no WMDs were found (I was one of those back then btw).  I also remember when the vast majority were for forcing businesses to close 2 years ago due to a virus that the vast majority of people would survive without even needing hospital care.
 

When the recession hits, the vast majority will not be ok with $6+ a gallon.