Can't imagine there's too many NATO members really interested in going to war for Ukraine.
Ukraine borders Poland, Slovakia, Romania, and Hungary. I'm not sure those countries will be very interested in having Russia right up on their doorstop.
Members are admitted by unanimous agreement, so it’s not enough that some current members are in favor of Ukraine membership, and members against Ukraine joining aren’t small countries that could be possibly pressured into it (France, Germany). And even in that small list of potential supporters, Hungary has better relations with Russia than it does Ukraine, and won’t necessarily lobby for Ukraine to join.
(2019) BUDAPEST (Reuters) - Hungary's foreign minister on Wednesday said Budapest would block Ukraine's membership in NATO until Kiev restored the rights that ethnic Hungarians had before a language law curbed minorities' access to education in their mother tongues.
Hungary has clashed with Ukraine over what it says are curbs on the rights of roughly 150,000 ethnic Hungarians to use their native tongue, especially in education, after Ukraine passed a law in 2017 restricting the use of minority languages.
"We ask for no extra rights to Hungarians in Transcarpathia, only those rights they had before," Szijjarto told state news agency MTI at the NATO summit in London.
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Yeah, it's worth noting that Greece held up the entry of North Macedonia for years due to a naming dispute (as Greece has a province also named Macedonia and the whole legacy of Alexander thing)
Yeah, it's worth noting that Greece held up the entry of North Macedonia for years due to a naming dispute (as Greece has a province also named Macedonia and the whole legacy of Alexander thing)
In specific, there was the concern that North Macedonia would use said cultural legacy as a way to legitimate territorial claims to Northern Greece to form a "United Macedonia". Which was a real concern, the Roosevelt admin said as much. So, North Macedonia had to sign a treaty saying explicitely that they aren't related to either the Hellenic heritage or Alexander the Great.
So, is like saying that Erdogan calling Turkey "descendants of the Ottomans" is just about their cultural legacy.
As far as I know, North Macedonia never made any such claims. They also are a small, poor country who wouldn't be able to win against Greece if they wanted.
Idk why Roosevelt felt it was a real issue. Maybe because at the time North Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia under Tito?
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Nobody wants that. Specially the rest of Europe.
Germany ain't going to start WW3 out of spite if America stops the Nord Stream. Their population is very, very anti-military, to the point where the Bundeswher has perpetual budget and recruiting issues.
As far as I know, North Macedonia never made any such claims. They also are a small, poor country who wouldn't be able to win against Greece if they wanted.
Idk why Roosevelt felt it was a real issue. Maybe because at the time North Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia under Tito?
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Nobody wants that. Specially the rest of Europe.
Germany ain't going to start WW3 out of spite if America stops the Nord Stream. Their population is very, very anti-military, to the point where the Bundeswher has perpetual budget and recruiting issues.
This is a hilariously bad line of thinking.
I don't think it is about Germany starting WW3 its more the cost of isolating a close partner who is crucial for a lot of different issues from climate change to Russia to Iran to trade isn't worth the trade off. I do see the logic of not going after the pipeline unless the US can 100% guarantee an equal level of energy supplies to Germany from another route.
Im talking in response to the line "Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe."
Yes, I agree blocking Nord Stream 2 isn't worth pissing off Germany. But that's not what my post was about.
Im talking in response to the line "Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe."
Yes, I agree blocking Nord Stream 2 isn't worth pissing off Germany. But that's not what my post was about.
What you say makes sense in a world where Germany is under the US security umbrella. Germany cutting off relationships with the US kinda puts a damper on that.
Anyways, it doesn't matter. What matters is what Biden and the NSC think, and they believe that is not worth it.
As far as I know, North Macedonia never made any such claims. They also are a small, poor country who wouldn't be able to win against Greece if they wanted.
Idk why Roosevelt felt it was a real issue. Maybe because at the time North Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia under Tito?
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Nobody wants that. Specially the rest of Europe.
Germany ain't going to start WW3 out of spite if America stops the Nord Stream. Their population is very, very anti-military, to the point where the Bundeswher has perpetual budget and recruiting issues.
This is a hilariously bad line of thinking.
They don't have to start WW3
"No more US military bases in Germany" would be enough. Most of the US / NATO bases in Europe are located in Germany, and they're the big ones too
Again, not talking about that, talking about the line "Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response"
Again, not talking about that, talking about the line "Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response"
"How would it be if the United States were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections directly of other countries and everybody knew it? What would it be like if we engaged in activities that he engaged in? It diminishes the standing of a country."
A 2016 study by Dov H. Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined the United States and Russia (including its predecessor, the Soviet Union) combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions.
According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36. A 2018 study by Levin found that the electoral interventions determined in "many cases" the identity of the winner. The study also found suggestive evidence that the interventions increased the risk of democratic breakdown in the targeted states.
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
"How would it be if the United States were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections directly of other countries and everybody knew it? What would it be like if we engaged in activities that he engaged in? It diminishes the standing of a country."
A 2016 study by Dov H. Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined the United States and Russia (including its predecessor, the Soviet Union) combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions.
According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36. A 2018 study by Levin found that the electoral interventions determined in "many cases" the identity of the winner. The study also found suggestive evidence that the interventions increased the risk of democratic breakdown in the targeted states.
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
Yeah, I can’t even fucking fathom what that looks like, Joe. You sanctimonious asshole.
“Listen if we didn’t interfere in a foreign election, we’d have to invent one!”
“Satirical version of President Biden meant to represent your real self’s ideology regarding US interests versus the sanctity of democratic sovereignty abroad, what on earth does that mean?!”
“It means shut up and let us do imperialism while pretending to be the stewards of democracy and political freedom you nerd.”
As far as I know, North Macedonia never made any such claims. They also are a small, poor country who wouldn't be able to win against Greece if they wanted.
Idk why Roosevelt felt it was a real issue. Maybe because at the time North Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia under Tito?
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Nobody wants that. Specially the rest of Europe.
Germany ain't going to start WW3 out of spite if America stops the Nord Stream. Their population is very, very anti-military, to the point where the Bundeswher has perpetual budget and recruiting issues.
This is a hilariously bad line of thinking.
I don't think it is about Germany starting WW3 its more the cost of isolating a close partner who is crucial for a lot of different issues from climate change to Russia to Iran to trade isn't worth the trade off. I do see the logic of not going after the pipeline unless the US can 100% guarantee an equal level of energy supplies to Germany from another route.
Also Trump (being both excoriated at home for being some kind of stooge and not a fan of Germany) might have found some satisfaction in it sticking to Germany, or simply didn’t care how much they protested his sanctions. The sanctions, at the time they were implemented, felt to me sort of vindictive, or a tactless way to call out Germany for hypocrisy.
"How would it be if the United States were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections directly of other countries and everybody knew it? What would it be like if we engaged in activities that he engaged in? It diminishes the standing of a country."
A 2016 study by Dov H. Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined the United States and Russia (including its predecessor, the Soviet Union) combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions.
According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36. A 2018 study by Levin found that the electoral interventions determined in "many cases" the identity of the winner. The study also found suggestive evidence that the interventions increased the risk of democratic breakdown in the targeted states.
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
"How would it be if the United States were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections directly of other countries and everybody knew it? What would it be like if we engaged in activities that he engaged in? It diminishes the standing of a country."
A 2016 study by Dov H. Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined the United States and Russia (including its predecessor, the Soviet Union) combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions.
According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36. A 2018 study by Levin found that the electoral interventions determined in "many cases" the identity of the winner. The study also found suggestive evidence that the interventions increased the risk of democratic breakdown in the targeted states.
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
"How would it be if the United States were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections directly of other countries and everybody knew it? What would it be like if we engaged in activities that he engaged in? It diminishes the standing of a country."
A 2016 study by Dov H. Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined the United States and Russia (including its predecessor, the Soviet Union) combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions.
According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36. A 2018 study by Levin found that the electoral interventions determined in "many cases" the identity of the winner. The study also found suggestive evidence that the interventions increased the risk of democratic breakdown in the targeted states.
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
Yeah, I can’t even fucking fathom what that looks like, Joe. You sanctimonious asshole.
For a thread of people fancying themselves as politically savvy this is an incredibly naive take on what's happening in this speech.
If that is what helps you sleep at night, you can burnish that take all you want.
What this is is yet another whitewashing of it’s history by the nation that leads the world in overthrowing governments through interfering with their elections or overt or varying degrees of covert violence by an old white man who was an elected official throughout much of it’s interference in South America, a leading voice in one of it’s major elected bodies including the invasion of Iraq and Vice President as it ran a coup in Honduras just over a decade ago.
And the leader of a party that last week condemned a young Muslim woman who had the gall to call her government to task for it’s history.
"How would it be if the United States were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections directly of other countries and everybody knew it? What would it be like if we engaged in activities that he engaged in? It diminishes the standing of a country."
A 2016 study by Dov H. Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined the United States and Russia (including its predecessor, the Soviet Union) combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions.
According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36. A 2018 study by Levin found that the electoral interventions determined in "many cases" the identity of the winner. The study also found suggestive evidence that the interventions increased the risk of democratic breakdown in the targeted states.
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
Yeah, I can’t even fucking fathom what that looks like, Joe. You sanctimonious asshole.
For a thread of people fancying themselves as politically savvy this is an incredibly naive take on what's happening in this speech.
If that is what helps you sleep at night, you can burnish that take all you want.
What this is is yet another whitewashing of it’s history by the nation that leads the world in overthrowing governments through interfering with their elections or overt or varying degrees of covert violence by an old white man who was an elected official throughout much of it’s interference in South America, a leading voice in one of it’s major elected bodies including the invasion of Iraq and Vice President as it ran a coup in Honduras just over a decade ago.
And the leader of a party that last week condemned a young Muslim woman who had the gall to call her government to task for it’s history.
What, you expected the US President to stand up in front of world and say "Yo, we suck!"?? Please. This is just ridiculously naive.
Of course the the US President is saying this kind of shit. What else was he gonna say?
As far as I know, North Macedonia never made any such claims. They also are a small, poor country who wouldn't be able to win against Greece if they wanted.
Idk why Roosevelt felt it was a real issue. Maybe because at the time North Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia under Tito?
There was a story in the WP from last night that touched on the decision to waive sanctions over NordStream 2.
Last month’s decision to withhold sanctions against the company and CEO behind the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline was particularly divisive. Critics of the pipeline, which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, view its imminent completion and operation as a major geopolitical coup for the Kremlin.
The State Department, in a position backed by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, his deputy Wendy Sherman and Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, recommended a raft of U.S. sanctions intended to block the pipeline, without waivers for the company or chief executive, said officials familiar with the decision.
Biden, backed by top aides on the National Security Council, disagreed, arguing that the move would inflame relations with Germany, a key ally that views attempts to block the pipeline as a violation of its sovereignty. With the pipeline over 90 percent complete, White House officials viewed the project as a fait accompli that was not worth jeopardizing the U.S.-Germany relationship over.
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Nobody wants that. Specially the rest of Europe.
Germany ain't going to start WW3 out of spite if America stops the Nord Stream. Their population is very, very anti-military, to the point where the Bundeswher has perpetual budget and recruiting issues.
This is a hilariously bad line of thinking.
To be honest, I almost wish they would stop it, and get Germany to turn their nuke plants back on to keep their energy prices low and protect their sovereignty.
the most charitable read on it is that he's trolling putin a bit, since one of putin's big beefs is the way the u.s. fucked around in russia after the USSR fell
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
the most charitable read on it is that he's trolling putin a bit, since one of putin's big beefs is the way the u.s. fucked around in russia after the USSR fell
The most charitable read is that he's talking about 2016
I like to think Biden did that just as a troll, it gives me a little joy
It should not, if your value is democracy is sacred and not just “don’t fuck with America”
Because, again, the US’s favorite pastime in the Cold War was “undermine every nation’s democracy who didn’t toe the line with what we wanted from them”
the most charitable read on it is that he's trolling putin a bit, since one of putin's big beefs is the way the u.s. fucked around in russia after the USSR fell
The most charitable read is that he's talking about 2016
I'm not sure he could be any more obvious about that being what he's saying. He's gonna stand up there and he's gonna decry the interference in the 2016 election (and probably interference they tried in the 2020 one as well). Which is something the US president should condemn. And he's not gonna talk about things that undermine his own country or his point. Cause why would you do that?
I hope he's trolling putin because at least then there might be some tiny strategic calculation behind it; otherwise he either thinks we're all giant oblivious dumbasses or is one himself
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
The strategic calculation is "I'm going to complain about russian election interference" and the hypocrisy doesn't matter because hypocrisy has never mattered.
the most charitable read on it is that he's trolling putin a bit, since one of putin's big beefs is the way the u.s. fucked around in russia after the USSR fell
The most charitable read is that he's talking about 2016
And just 2016 please don't look any further nothing to see.
The strategic calculation is "I'm going to complain about russian election interference" and the hypocrisy doesn't matter because hypocrisy has never mattered.
Well unless you’re Iran or any number of Latin American nations that got CIA’d, dictator’d or death squad’d.
Speaking of anyone know if we’re building the consent engine to help the fascist lady in Peru pulling a Trump yet?
Its entirely accurate to say Americans don't care about hypocrisy here. Its morally incoherent to use that as a basis for not caring yourself.
Republicans don't, Democrats aren't all happy about America foreign policy installing dictatorships. They're morally consistent since it's being against the practice itself. Americans don't agree about every policy the government makes, foreign or domestic. Biden's foreign policies aren't identical to Trump's - someone who's tongue was permanently stuck to Putin's boot.
America's foreign policy is notably bipartisan in support
It's far more complicated than that. here are policies which are bipartisan but why Democrats and Republicans do something its not exclusively for the same reasons and changes from person to person and that's just politicians. This gets more varied when is about the American public, it's not like being against American backed rigged elections and coups is controversial in Democratic circles, that's just being a Democrat. This is why liberals hated Dubya for so long with his wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we hated what that fucker did with a thousands suns and we weren't quiet about it; the same goes for Trump.
Do you think Democrats liked Trump's foreign policy?
I think that the Dems didn't like certain details of Trumps' foreign policy, but that the broad strokes weren't that much different from what they do anyway. There are some exceptions. Paris accords. Trump was unusual. But largely? The US' actions to maintain itself as a hegemonic power has bipartisan support. The War on Drugs and War on Terror had large bipartisan support.
America's foreign policy is notably bipartisan in support
It's far more complicated than that. here are policies which are bipartisan but why Democrats and Republicans do something its not exclusively for the same reasons and changes from person to person and that's just politicians. This gets more varied when is about the American public, it's not like being against American backed rigged elections and coups is controversial in Democratic circles, that's just being a Democrat. This is why liberals hated Dubya for so long with his wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we hated what that fucker did with a thousands suns and we weren't quiet about it; the same goes for Trump.
Do you think Democrats liked Trump's foreign policy?
Most of Bush’s climb back to popularity came from Democrats and independents. His favorability mark among Democrats has soared from only 11% in February 2009 to a majority 54% now.
0
Options
MeeqeLord of the pants most fancySomeplace amazingRegistered Userregular
Its entirely accurate to say Americans don't care about hypocrisy here. Its morally incoherent to use that as a basis for not caring yourself.
Republicans don't, Democrats aren't all happy about America foreign policy installing dictatorships. They're morally consistent since it's being against the practice itself. Americans don't agree about every policy the government makes, foreign or domestic. Biden's foreign policies aren't identical to Trump's - someone who's tongue was permanently stuck to Putin's boot.
This is naive about the history of the US Govt and the Democratic parties frequent use of the CIA and other arms of the US intelligence services. As Solar posted about, both parties absolutely do engage in these actions overseas, all the time. Like, your post is straight up false.
Honestly surprised that anyone saw that statement from Biden as strictly referring to 2016. Like he just straight up offers hypotheticals about how we'd be viewed for things we absolutely have done.
Styrofoam Sammich on
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
America's foreign policy is notably bipartisan in support
It's far more complicated than that. here are policies which are bipartisan but why Democrats and Republicans do something its not exclusively for the same reasons and changes from person to person and that's just politicians. This gets more varied when is about the American public, it's not like being against American backed rigged elections and coups is controversial in Democratic circles, that's just being a Democrat. This is why liberals hated Dubya for so long with his wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we hated what that fucker did with a thousands suns and we weren't quiet about it; the same goes for Trump.
Do you think Democrats liked Trump's foreign policy?
Most of Bush’s climb back to popularity came from Democrats and independents. His favorability mark among Democrats has soared from only 11% in February 2009 to a majority 54% now.
Posts
Members are admitted by unanimous agreement, so it’s not enough that some current members are in favor of Ukraine membership, and members against Ukraine joining aren’t small countries that could be possibly pressured into it (France, Germany). And even in that small list of potential supporters, Hungary has better relations with Russia than it does Ukraine, and won’t necessarily lobby for Ukraine to join.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/biden-putin-summit/2021/06/15/19657e2c-cd44-11eb-9b7e-e06f6cfdece8_story.html
I expected this, if Biden wanted to repair relations with big European allies. One thing that got lost in the noise of Trump being generally terrible, and specifically bad in his cozy rhetoric with Putin, is how much he was pissing off Germany with his Russia-related sanctions.
Pretty much spelling out what I wrote earlier. Germany sees attempts to block the pipeline as "a violation of its sovereignty". That's incredibly strong language, and again, if the US goes for it, we are talking about a Germany facing an international humilliation and relative isolation, without much of anything stopping a military buildup in response aka going back to pre-1945 Europe.
Nobody wants that. Specially the rest of Europe.
In specific, there was the concern that North Macedonia would use said cultural legacy as a way to legitimate territorial claims to Northern Greece to form a "United Macedonia". Which was a real concern, the Roosevelt admin said as much. So, North Macedonia had to sign a treaty saying explicitely that they aren't related to either the Hellenic heritage or Alexander the Great.
So, is like saying that Erdogan calling Turkey "descendants of the Ottomans" is just about their cultural legacy.
Idk why Roosevelt felt it was a real issue. Maybe because at the time North Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia under Tito?
Germany ain't going to start WW3 out of spite if America stops the Nord Stream. Their population is very, very anti-military, to the point where the Bundeswher has perpetual budget and recruiting issues.
This is a hilariously bad line of thinking.
I don't think it is about Germany starting WW3 its more the cost of isolating a close partner who is crucial for a lot of different issues from climate change to Russia to Iran to trade isn't worth the trade off. I do see the logic of not going after the pipeline unless the US can 100% guarantee an equal level of energy supplies to Germany from another route.
Yes, I agree blocking Nord Stream 2 isn't worth pissing off Germany. But that's not what my post was about.
What you say makes sense in a world where Germany is under the US security umbrella. Germany cutting off relationships with the US kinda puts a damper on that.
Anyways, it doesn't matter. What matters is what Biden and the NSC think, and they believe that is not worth it.
They don't have to start WW3
"No more US military bases in Germany" would be enough. Most of the US / NATO bases in Europe are located in Germany, and they're the big ones too
Speaking of which how is the AFD doing in polls?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_intervention
And that’s before you wade into the regime change side of supporting dictators, training deathsquads, overthrowing democratically elected governments...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change
Yeah, I can’t even fucking fathom what that looks like, Joe. You sanctimonious asshole.
“Listen if we didn’t interfere in a foreign election, we’d have to invent one!”
“Satirical version of President Biden meant to represent your real self’s ideology regarding US interests versus the sanctity of democratic sovereignty abroad, what on earth does that mean?!”
“It means shut up and let us do imperialism while pretending to be the stewards of democracy and political freedom you nerd.”
Also Trump (being both excoriated at home for being some kind of stooge and not a fan of Germany) might have found some satisfaction in it sticking to Germany, or simply didn’t care how much they protested his sanctions. The sanctions, at the time they were implemented, felt to me sort of vindictive, or a tactless way to call out Germany for hypocrisy.
For a thread of people fancying themselves as politically savvy this is an incredibly naive take on what's happening in this speech.
Oh, it's an apology?
If that is what helps you sleep at night, you can burnish that take all you want.
What this is is yet another whitewashing of it’s history by the nation that leads the world in overthrowing governments through interfering with their elections or overt or varying degrees of covert violence by an old white man who was an elected official throughout much of it’s interference in South America, a leading voice in one of it’s major elected bodies including the invasion of Iraq and Vice President as it ran a coup in Honduras just over a decade ago.
And the leader of a party that last week condemned a young Muslim woman who had the gall to call her government to task for it’s history.
What, you expected the US President to stand up in front of world and say "Yo, we suck!"?? Please. This is just ridiculously naive.
Of course the the US President is saying this kind of shit. What else was he gonna say?
It’s also an attitude of pragmatism that reconciles very poorly with six years of “Oh my god Russia is assaulting our sacred democracy!”
To be honest, I almost wish they would stop it, and get Germany to turn their nuke plants back on to keep their energy prices low and protect their sovereignty.
MWO: Adamski
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
The most charitable read is that he's talking about 2016
It should not, if your value is democracy is sacred and not just “don’t fuck with America”
Because, again, the US’s favorite pastime in the Cold War was “undermine every nation’s democracy who didn’t toe the line with what we wanted from them”
I'm not sure he could be any more obvious about that being what he's saying. He's gonna stand up there and he's gonna decry the interference in the 2016 election (and probably interference they tried in the 2020 one as well). Which is something the US president should condemn. And he's not gonna talk about things that undermine his own country or his point. Cause why would you do that?
I hope he's trolling putin because at least then there might be some tiny strategic calculation behind it; otherwise he either thinks we're all giant oblivious dumbasses or is one himself
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
And just 2016 please don't look any further nothing to see.
Well unless you’re Iran or any number of Latin American nations that got CIA’d, dictator’d or death squad’d.
Speaking of anyone know if we’re building the consent engine to help the fascist lady in Peru pulling a Trump yet?
Republicans don't, Democrats aren't all happy about America foreign policy installing dictatorships. They're morally consistent since it's being against the practice itself. Americans don't agree about every policy the government makes, foreign or domestic. Biden's foreign policies aren't identical to Trump's - someone who's tongue was permanently stuck to Putin's boot.
It's far more complicated than that. here are policies which are bipartisan but why Democrats and Republicans do something its not exclusively for the same reasons and changes from person to person and that's just politicians. This gets more varied when is about the American public, it's not like being against American backed rigged elections and coups is controversial in Democratic circles, that's just being a Democrat. This is why liberals hated Dubya for so long with his wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we hated what that fucker did with a thousands suns and we weren't quiet about it; the same goes for Trump.
Do you think Democrats liked Trump's foreign policy?
I think that the Dems didn't like certain details of Trumps' foreign policy, but that the broad strokes weren't that much different from what they do anyway. There are some exceptions. Paris accords. Trump was unusual. But largely? The US' actions to maintain itself as a hegemonic power has bipartisan support. The War on Drugs and War on Terror had large bipartisan support.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/22/politics/george-w-bush-favorable-poll/index.html
This is naive about the history of the US Govt and the Democratic parties frequent use of the CIA and other arms of the US intelligence services. As Solar posted about, both parties absolutely do engage in these actions overseas, all the time. Like, your post is straight up false.
He isn't president anymore, which helps a lot