Politics

[Ray B]

Depending on the type of average, there is always going to be 1/2 below and 1/2 above- that is what an average is. The difficult part for those above average is the possibility that after they die, someone will cast their ballot for a candidate that appeals to the lower half.

 

[Hogpatrol]

I was party to an election for a limited number of representatives to go to Las Vegas for a safety convention. All but one had valid reasons for going. That candidate stated he wanted to go to play golf, go to the casinos, take in a show and maybe engage in some extra curricular activities. He was a very likable guy and won handily. This is how elections are won, mostly glad handing and a good line of bullshit. IQ isn't a factor.

 

[spike.t]

Putin adviser Anatoly Chubais quits and leaves Russia over invasion of Ukraine

The Kremlin’s climate envoy resigns from government in highest-ranking defection yet

www.theguardian.com

 

[BSO Dave]

Just read Trump's actual comments from his Stuart Varney interview day before yesterday. I voted for this guy twice. But damn. We have to come up with another option. I have no idea what he was trying to say or what he thought he meant.

@Red Leg ,
You have consistently represented yourself here as an informed guy with the rare combination of both intellect and common sense. So, it surprises me that you are still "uncomfortable" with Trump's manner of public speaking.

Trump has always spoken in this manner. He is famous for going on tangents and moving on to the next thought before completing the first.. I also happen to think that this unscripted, and often wreckless style of speaking is a huge part of what endeared him to the voters in the first place. Trump's overall style was a swift and much needed kick in the ass for a government dominated by swamp dwellers only capable of spewing scripted talking points... By now, I would think you would have acknowledged that Trump is best measured by his actions and results and not by his demeanor and rhetoric.

I mean seriously - we are going to sail nuclear submarines up and down Russia's coast?!? Doing what exactly that they can't do a thousand miles at sea?

In all sincerity, in regard to your comment above, can you elaborate on why this is a silly notion? I am no military tactician or diplomat, but isn't this kinda the time and tested "go to" first step in intimidation and deterrence used by every global superpower since our ability to travel troops and weaponry across the seas? ICBM's kinda make all other forms of traditional warfare obsolete. Yet, the USA, Russia, and China still deploy these conventional weapons and troops strategically across the globe for nothing else but a deterrence correct?

Isn't the primary purpose of maintaining US military installations in Europe to serve as a deterrence for eastern aggression? Haven't we always send ships and subs to lurk off the coast of our adversaries as a deterrence? Kennedy brought us to the brink of WW3 because the Soviets put missiles with nuclear capabilities in Cuba right? Why did the Soviets need missiles in Cuba when they could have launched them from their own continent? I assume it was to posture aggression towards the US as a deterrence for us to use our own nukes? If it wasn't effective, why would we all still be doing this sabre rattling? Sincere questions... Not trying to be a smart-ass...

 

[Tundra Tiger]

As someone who voted for him twice, I'll take a very abbreviated swipe at that. The simple fact is he could have accomplished the same with regards to his actions and results, and done so with a reduction in what you call his demeanor and rhetoric. I firmly believe that reduction would have gotten him a second term and we wouldn't be in the mess we are in right now.

 

[SaintPanzer]

I just Googled, "Why did the USSR invade Czechoslovakia?"
The Brezhnev Doctrine
"They feared growing trade links between Czechoslovakia and West Germany would lead to an increase in Western influence in Eastern Europe".
Although no mention of NATO back in1968, I believe Putin had stated several times before he invaded Ukraine, that Ukraine's increased trade with and "leaning" towards the West, was unacceptable to him. So, it appears this present invasion of Ukraine by Russia isn't only about NATO encroaching eastward, but also about trade and influences from the West?

NATO was always the fig leaf...

 

[SaintPanzer]

For comparison, NATO bombing campaign in Serbia (1999) lasted 2.5 months, before Serbia retreated from Kosovo, and Nato goals have been achieved.

Only a follower of Douhet would ever think that bombing campaign had any chance of achieving its objectives. Douhet was wrong. Just flat-out, no idea what he was talking about wrong. As wrong as two boys... no, wait. They've told me I can't use that as an example anymore. Let's just say more wrong than Mahan, and leave it at that.

 

[fourfive8]

@Red Leg ,
You have consistently represented yourself here as an informed guy with the rare combination of both intellect and common sense. So, it surprises me that you are still "uncomfortable" with Trump's manner of public speaking.

Trump has always spoken in this manner. He is famous for going on tangents and moving on to the next thought before completing the first.. I also happen to think that this unscripted, and often wreckless style of speaking is a huge part of what endeared him to the voters in the first place. Trump's overall style was a swift and much needed kick in the ass for a government dominated by swamp dwellers only capable of spewing scripted talking points... By now, I would think you would have acknowledged that Trump is best measured by his actions and results and not by his demeanor and rhetoric.



In all sincerity, in regard to your comment above, can you elaborate on why this is a silly notion? I am no military tactician or diplomat, but isn't this kinda the time and tested "go to" first step in intimidation and deterrence used by every global superpower since our ability to travel troops and weaponry across the seas? ICBM's kinda make all other forms of traditional warfare obsolete. Yet, the USA, Russia, and China still deploy these conventional weapons and troops strategically across the globe for nothing else but a deterrence correct?

Isn't the primary purpose of maintaining US military installations in Europe to serve as a deterrence for eastern aggression? Haven't we always send ships and subs to lurk off the coast of our adversaries as a deterrence? Kennedy brought us to the brink of WW3 because the Soviets put missiles with nuclear capabilities in Cuba right? Why did the Soviets need missiles in Cuba when they could have launched them from their own continent? I assume it was to posture aggression towards the US as a deterrence for us to use our own nukes? If it wasn't effective, why would we all still be doing this sabre rattling? Sincere questions... Not trying to be a smart-ass...

@BSO Dave, you are spot on! For reasons I cannot fathom, some on "our" side remain negatively fixated on the mannerisms of Trump- almost to level of a mental disorder. That plays right into the hands of our enemies within and if it continues we will end up with another Biden-Harris or worse. History does repeat itself on occasion. Good grief! Trump has not been president for how long now, well over a year, and still the enemies of the US within on the other side along with the "washed, above the fray", never-Trumpers on "our" side still blame him for whatever the ailment of today is- foreign or domestic or even what might happen tomorrow!! Go ahead keep it up, keep blaming Trump or Putin or whomever, anyone or anything except the senile POTUS bastard (and admin) we have, split the base again and see what happens.

To the war front- it's very worrisome to me that it almost seems like Russian propaganda does work to an extent... to hear some talk, you'd think Ukraine had invaded Russia or that Russia is not understood or that Russia is a victim, etc.... I hear under tones of that crap from closet Russian apologists more and more.

 

[Red Leg]

@Red Leg ,
You have consistently represented yourself here as an informed guy with the rare combination of both intellect and common sense. So, it surprises me that you are still "uncomfortable" with Trump's manner of public speaking.

Trump has always spoken in this manner. He is famous for going on tangents and moving on to the next thought before completing the first.. I also happen to think that this unscripted, and often wreckless style of speaking is a huge part of what endeared him to the voters in the first place. Trump's overall style was a swift and much needed kick in the ass for a government dominated by swamp dwellers only capable of spewing scripted talking points... By now, I would think you would have acknowledged that Trump is best measured by his actions and results and not by his demeanor and rhetoric.



In all sincerity, in regard to your comment above, can you elaborate on why this is a silly notion? I am no military tactician or diplomat, but isn't this kinda the time and tested "go to" first step in intimidation and deterrence used by every global superpower since our ability to travel troops and weaponry across the seas? ICBM's kinda make all other forms of traditional warfare obsolete. Yet, the USA, Russia, and China still deploy these conventional weapons and troops strategically across the globe for nothing else but a deterrence correct?

Isn't the primary purpose of maintaining US military installations in Europe to serve as a deterrence for eastern aggression? Haven't we always send ships and subs to lurk off the coast of our adversaries as a deterrence? Kennedy brought us to the brink of WW3 because the Soviets put missiles with nuclear capabilities in Cuba right? Why did the Soviets need missiles in Cuba when they could have launched them from their own continent? I assume it was to posture aggression towards the US as a deterrence for us to use our own nukes? If it wasn't effective, why would we all still be doing this sabre rattling? Sincere questions... Not trying to be a smart-ass...

The missiles on an Ohio class submarine have an unclassified 4000 mile range. They are only of value as a deterrent so long as the submarine remains undetectable. Hence they are well away from land and already range every inch of Russia. Not exactly the best choice for gunboat diplomacy. In these two paragraphs he doesn’t sound merely syntax challenged - he sounds like an idiot.

Yes, I supported and still support most of his domestic and international agenda. I think his approach with NATO was not in our national interests, but the alliance fortunately survived. Nothing like a real threat to get defense spending north of 2% GDP.

But I am weary to tears of his inarticulate, ill considered, self-defeating ramblings that are too often demonstrably gross exaggeration if not absolutely false. You can check for yourself how many nuclear submarine programs were initiated on his watch. He did authorize a third Virginia class attack boat. Maybe that is what he meant.

If he runs again, he will be Biden’s age upon election. He may even be less able to put together a coherent thought than Biden by that point.

I beg for the opportunity to vote for similar policies led by one of at least two candidates I would eagerly support.

And you point out a real problem. Many of the MAGA brigades are indeed wedded to Trump rather than Trump’s specific policies. And he does indeed still have the power to turn those acolytes against anyone who triggers his ire on a given day.

Hell, he even turns on loyalists. He abandoned Mo Brooks today (no great loss) who seems to be only guilty of being totally loyal. He is also running third, and it could be backing a winner is more important than rewarding loyalty. One of those political calculations.

We need to figure this out.

 

[shootist~]

Trump lost because a Huge number of non-liberals voted Against him. Even knowing the Democrats had the worst candidate since Dukakis, if not forever.
I know some of them, and they will do it again if Trump is nominated.

 

[wesheltonj]

Trump lost because a Huge number of non-liberals voted Against him. Even knowing the Democrats had the worst candidate since Dukakis, if not forever.
I know some of them, and they will do it again if Trump is nominated.

And they may, but that will not prevent a second trump loss. It's the mail-in's real and fake that killed him.

While I agree that Trump can be Rude, Crude and Social Unacceptable. Bush 2 said nothing and was to beat up by the press to no end and made out to be an idiot, just as Reagan, Bush 1. At least with Trump he does not take shit and gives it right back to them. I am afraid that anyone else would be just another Bush 2.

 

[Tundra Tiger]

@Red Leg : I beg for the opportunity to vote for similar policies led by one of at least two candidates I would eagerly support.

Well stated sir.

 

[BSO Dave]

The missiles on an Ohio class submarine have an unclassified 4000 mile range. They are only of value as a deterrent so long as the submarine remains undetectable. Hence they are well away from land and already range every inch of Russia. Not exactly the best choice for gunboat diplomacy.

Not to beat this to death, but am genuinely interested in the point you are making that I am somehow missing? I do believe that in that interview Trump was referring to utilizing the subs as an example of a potential form of gunboat diplomacy. But, isn't the entire idea behind gunboat diplomacy to make the threat visibly known to the enemy? We know the subs have a 4,000 l mile range. Russia knows the subs have a 4,000 mile range, but you cannot argue the message that is sent by having a subs, carriers, destroyers or F-22's doing flyovers on the enemy's doorstep in plain view of the entire world to see? If there was no value in this, then why do all of the countries with the capabilities to show force continue to do so?

I beg for the opportunity to vote for similar policies led by one of at least two candidates I would eagerly support.

I agree completely... But, for the sake of argument let's assume Trump was to win the nomination in 2024.. You will hold your nose and vote for him a 3rd time because the alternatives are unthinkable.. You will suffer through the pain of mean tweets and arrogant rants to get back our freedoms, a sovereign border, inflation under control, the resumption of energy independence, and the rule of law enforced in this country once again.

I know some of them, and they will do it again if Trump is nominated.

After enduring what we have for the last 13 months, and they vote to continue with our destruction, then they are indeed a special kind of stupid..

 

[Ray B]

Ohio class submarine are only of value as a deterrent so long as the submarine remains undetectable.

Several years ago I read that there was technology to track the submarines by the minute variations of water temperature/wake caused by the submerged submarine. The tracking was done via satellite. I'm not sure what counter-measures the US navy has implemented but for every counter-measure there is motivation for a new measure.

 

[Wheels]

CNN uses Jeffrey Toobin as it's porn expert.

 

[BSO Dave]

As someone who voted for him twice, I'll take a very abbreviated swipe at that. The simple fact is he could have accomplished the same with regards to his actions and results, and done so with a reduction in what you call his demeanor and rhetoric. I firmly believe that reduction would have gotten him a second term and we wouldn't be in the mess we are in right now.

I have a different perspective..

I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the exact same personality and demeanor that got Trump elected in 2016 is the reason he lost the 2020 election. He didn't lose because of his personality. His base increased significantly in 4 years, and he got more legitimate votes in 2020 than any candidate in this county's history.. A very untimely false Covid narrative perpetuated by the left with a huge assist from the MSM was the major contributing factor in Trump's 2020 loss. Trump lost because too many uninformed and emotion-based voters were able to mail in ballots. Not because of mean tweets..

 

[Wheels]

 

[Wheels]

 

[Red Leg]

Not to beat this to death, but am genuinely interested in the point you are making that I am somehow missing? I do believe that in that interview Trump was referring to utilizing the subs as an example of a potential form of gunboat diplomacy. But, isn't the entire idea behind gunboat diplomacy to make the threat visibly known to the enemy? We know the subs have a 4,000 l mile range. Russia knows the subs have a 4,000 mile range, but you cannot argue the message that is sent by having a subs, carriers, destroyers or F-22's doing flyovers on the enemy's doorstep in plain view of the entire world to see? If there was no value in this, then why do all of the countries with the capabilities to show force continue to do so?



I agree completely... But, for the sake of argument let's assume Trump was to win the nomination in 2024.. You will hold your nose and vote for him a 3rd time because the alternatives are unthinkable.. You will suffer through the pain of mean tweets and arrogant rants to get back our freedoms, a sovereign border, inflation under control, the resumption of energy independence, and the rule of law enforced in this country once again.



After enduring what we have for the last 13 months, and they vote to continue with our destruction, then they are indeed a special kind of stupid..

I'll try one more time because I value your observations and you need to understand this. I only wish our former president comprehended the facts before he opened his mouth.

An attack submarine represents little real threat to Russia as a whole. It carries torpedoes and cruise missiles, but its primary role is as a sub/ship killer. Sailing it along the coast of Russia (more on that in a moment) would be irrelevant. So, we must assume, our former President was thinking about an Ohio class ballistic missile submarine. I am sure he must have simply miss-remembered that the first Ohio class boomer was launched in 1974. I am pretty sure he had nothing to do with it. Those 14 SLBM armed submarines (their are four with cruise missiles) make up the most critical component of our "Triad" deterrence (bombers/land-based Minutemen 2/Trident 2 SLBM).

The Ohio class boats each carry 24 Trident 2 SLBM missiles with a range of 4000+ miles. Each missile is MIRVed with 12 individually targeted warheads. They represent an undetectable guaranteed response of devastating throw weight to any attempted first strike. Announcing one patrolling the coast of anywhere merely means it is off launch station, is vulnerable to detection, and useless if needed. It would be the last vessel we would use to make a "statement."

And exactly to which coast was our geographer in chief referring? Get out a map and look at Russia. They have exactly two ice free "warm water" ports - in the Crimea and Kaliningrad. The Black Sea is a trap for any American warship and the later is like threatening Rhode Island.

The point being, he simply sounds ridiculous. The MAGA brigades will cheer and stomp their feet, but the Russians are merely laughing. It is particularly frustrating to me because up until that quaint deranged soliloquy, I had assumed he would have handled this better than Biden.

If you don't get my point, fine. I can't explain it any better.

And yes, I likely would hold my nose and vote for him again if i voted at all. But my regret would be that he really might not win, or in winning, accomplish so much less than an alternative.

 

[One Day...]

... But we’re a greater nuclear power. We have the greatest submarines in the world, most powerful machines ever built. Most powerful, and they got built under me. Most powerful machines ever built, and nobody knows where they are. And you should say, ‘Look, if you mention that word one more time, we’re going to send them over, and we’ll be coasting back and forth up and down your coast.’”

Reminds me of "Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to another country called Russia. Russia is a bigger country. Russia is a powerful country. Russia decided to invade a smaller country called Ukraine. So, basically that's wrong."

I spent 4 months begging everyone in sight: please vote the policies, do not vote just the man, but damn, one has to say, the leadership oratory offering for the next Presidential election of the greatest democracy in the world is indeed not much of an ad for democracy


PS 1: beside the syntax issue, the very argument conveys an uncomfortable misunderstanding of what a SSBN (Ship, Submersible, Ballistic, Nuclear) is and what its mission is...

PS 2: "and they got built under me"