For a Yale Law grad, Vance is - as are most US conservatives - amazingly shortsighted and perhaps outright ignorant of Putin and his long game that he's been playing since 2004 - look at the references to Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics, here: https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/russias-new-peace-proposal-to-ukraine - and if you want the full picture, read the full 16-page Dunlop article from 2004(!): https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics Trying to get conservatives, even nominally intelligent ones, to read this, even if you print it out and stick it in their faces is nearly impossible, I know, I've tried. They seem to prefer Ritter, Carlson, and Colonel MacGregor, and the Russian Foreign Ministry talking points they spew out in great profusion - good sound bites, little information content - to reading 16 page articles which blow those three useful fools out of the water. It's incredibly frustrating - and you'd think that Trump and Vance's national security people would be aware of this - but apparently not, you get the same useful fool talking points from them, too. The part of the Dunlop article to look at is the part which mentions the "Moscow-Teheran Axis".
As for Waltz, he said something in his taking of responsibility that makes this seem like a hack - or plain subterfuge: "Have you ever had somebody’s contact that shows their name and then you have somebody else’s number there?… Of course I didn’t see this loser in the group. It looked like someone else." I spoke with a friend who is familiar with Signal, and it turns out that you can change your screen name to anything you want - your phone number stays the same. So Waltz or his staffer accepts Goldberg into the group, thinking that it's someone who is legit - and he or his staffer doesn't check the phone number... So Goldberg spoofed Waltz - if this is the case - and after Goldberg is done with the chat, he can just change his name back to his real name - and he has plausible deniability. Waltz said at one point that one of the people in the group chat didn't receive any of the messages in the chat - and this would confirm the spoofing. And that means that Signal as it stands now is *very* insecure - for anyone who needs to maintain confidentiality - there needs to be some sort of code put in to stop this kid of spoofing.
Regarding Signal and name changing. Signal isn't the only app that allows that sort of thing. In fact in Whatsapp group chats it can very hard to see the actual phone# of people who aren't direct contacts, you just get what they want you to see (and when the name is Arabic and you don't read Arabic that can be fun).
I think there's a way to force the display on your device to be your name for the contact in Signal as opposed to the name chosen by that person, but I'm not enough of a signal user to be sure.
I wouldn't use Whatsapp on a bet, it's closed source, so you can't check it - and it's a Meta product which means that it probably has backdoors. It's free, but so is the cheese in a mouse trap. And I doubt that any of the people in the WH - except perhaps for Elon Musk - have the technical knowledge to defeat spoofing. I'll bet that they all d/l'ed the app from the AppStore. If they want a secure copy, it's not that difficult, just download the source, clean up the dodgy stuff, put in anti-spoofing code (a whitelist of names and phone numbers, or a phone directory lookup), and using Xcode, compile, link, and produce the iOS app.
Regarding Vance etc. and Putin. I read your previous post and I agree. I see no way for Eastern Europe to have stability while Russia exists in its current large form. Hence, as I've said at various times, my desired end goal is to see Russia broken up
The way things are going, that breakup may happen anyway, the Old Russian part may well lose its imperial colonies that they inherited from the Soviet Union, and before that, Imperial Russia. And this is because Putin has avoided, like the plague, using ethnic Russians from the Moscow - St Petersburg - Voronezh - Orel areas, because there would be a revolt. Instead, he uses the various non-ethnic Russian indigenous colonized people for his cannon fodder. Their cemeteries are filling up, and their patience is wearing thin, as is their support. An as time goes on, Putin is going to have less and less capability of projecting force to keep the colonies from leaving...
“What the master intends and what the master does will be as different as white knight to black bishop”.
Putin’s plans matter far less treat Russia’s capabilities. But whatever either are, it is not the US’s problem. If Europe had taken as much care of their Defence as they demand the US does, they would not be in this situation. They made their bed, they can lie in it.
Europe's problems eventually cross the ocean - after all, it was Hitler, under the Axis Pact, who declared war on the US on December 11, 1941. If he had not done so, it's unclear whether the US would have gotten into the war with Nazi Germany - Hitler had lots of ties to the US including Coca Cola, Disney (Hitler owned property in Los Angeles), IBM, and Ford Motor Company - Hitler had a life-size portrait of Henry Ford behind his desk in the Reichskanzlerei, and was a fan of Ford's since 1922, when the latter published a book entitled "The International Jew". Most of Hitler's ideas about Eugenics came from the US - see https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php
As for Putin, he's been bogged down in Ukraine for over three years, he's attempting to get by negotiations, deception, propaganda, and subterfuge, what he cannot get by military force. He will be lucky if China doesn't make a play for Russia's Far East, especially if the Straits of Malacca get cut off and the oil supply interdicted - and if China does make that play, it's doubtful that the Russian Army will be able to do much about it. Putin badly needs a break in hostilities, to re-man and rearm his rather depleted forces. His "peace negotiations" are no more than a play for time, Ukraine ought to keep him busy instead - "Sun Tzu advises, "If he is taking his ease, give him no rest." This means to keep your opponent constantly engaged and prevent them from having any respite, thereby weakening them over time."
But leaving Europe and Ukraine in the lurch isn't a good idea - Ukraine is doing a hell of a good job with our 30-year old materiel and munitions that formerly were headed to the junkyard - and our intel allows Ukraine to see where the Russian threats are coming from - and they're doing their part with drones warfare - see https://mickryan.substack.com/p/ukraine-strikes-back-hard
We are not leaving them in the lurch. We are refusing to come to the aid of spoiled brats who refused to take care of their own safety and are now demanding we do it for them. Help? Yes. Do? NO!.
.Yes, of course, a cessation in hostilities is just time for Putin to rearm. And? Ukraine bogged him down. In what universe will he ever have the resources to take on NATO? The US? Especially give the threat from China? Doesn’t mean he wont’ try, but he not going to be able to take all of Europe unless they want him to, and I am not sure they don’t.
And you would be well advised to read this - it's what Putin has been following since 2004:
Putin is also following what Aleksandr Dugin wrote in his Foundations of Geopolitics from 1997, again for which no reliable English translation is available, although a good summary of the main points is available. Most notably, as to Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus:
“As for the former union republics of the USSR situated within Europe, they all, in Dugin's view, (with the exception of Estonia) should be absorbed by Eurasia-Russia. "Belorussia," Dugin asserts flatly, "should be seen as a part of Russia" (377). In similar fashion, Moldova is seen as a part of what Dugin calls "the Russian South" (343).
On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions," he warns, "represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics" (348). And he adds that, "[T]he independent existence of Ukraine (especially within its present borders) can make sense only as a 'sanitary cordon'" (379). However, as we have seen, for Dugin all such "sanitary cordons" are inadmissible.
Dugin speculates that three extreme western regions of Ukraine--Volynia, Galicia, and Trans- Carpathia--heavily populated with Uniates and other Catholics, could be permitted to form an independent "Western Ukrainian Federation." But this area must not under any circumstances be permitted to fall under Atlanticist control (382). With the exception of these three western regions, Ukraine, like Belorussia, is seen as an integral part of Eurasia-Russia.
At one point in his book, Dugin confides that all arrangements made with "the Eurasian bloc of the continental West," headed by Germany, will be merely temporary and provisional in nature. "The maximum task [of the future]," he underscores, "is the 'Finlandization' of all of Europe" (369).” (page number references are to the Russian version of Foundations of Geopolitics.)
As to the United States, Western Europe, and NATO - which Dugin refers to as“the Atlanticists”:
“One way in which Russia will be able to turn other states against Atlanticism will be an astute use of the country's raw material riches. "In the beginning stage [of the struggle against Atlanticism]," Dugin writes, "Russia can offer its potential partners in the East and West its resources as compensation for exacerbating their relations with the U.S." (276). To induce the Anaconda to release its grip on the coastline of Eurasia, it must be attacked relentlessly on its home territory, within its own hemisphere, and throughout Eurasia. "All levels of geopolitical pressure," Dugin insists, "must be activated simultaneously" (367).
Within the United States itself, there is a need for the Russian special services and their allies "to provoke all forms of instability and separatism within the borders of the United States (it is possible to make use of the political forces of Afro-American racists)" (248). "It is especially important," Dugin adds, "to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements-- extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics" (367).
Dugin's Eurasian project also mandates attacking the United States through Central and South America. "The Eurasian project," Dugin writes, "proposes Eurasian expansion into South and Central America with the goal of freeing them from the control of the North" (248). 48 As a result of such unrelenting destabilization efforts, the United States and its close ally Britain eventually will be forced to leave the shores of Eurasia (and Africa). "The entire gigantic edifice of Atlanticism," Dugin prophesies, "will collapse" (259). He believes that this could happen unexpectedly, as occurred with the sudden collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR. Expelled from the shores of Eurasia, the United States would then be required to "limit its influence to the Americas" (367).” Ibid.
Putin has adopted the ideas set forth by Dugin as his policy for Ukraine, Europe, NATO, the US - and the broader world, as is obvious from his military actions in Chechnya, Georgia, Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea, Moldova/Transnistria, Belarus, and now Ukraine, since 2004. Putin is playing the long game, he’s been actively at it for the past 20 years. This did not start just three years ago in 2022. The Western governments have been asleep at the switch but now they appear to be waking up, especially those in the Baltic and Balkan states - and Putin has his designs on these as well, as seen by his rhetoric and actions towards them..." https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/russias-new-peace-proposal-to-ukraine
So what. Again, “What the masters intends and does ….. “. Putin doesn’t have another 20 years. Probably not even 10. All he can accomplish to really mess things up in Europe but tho is could be prevented if the freeloading Europeans took their situation seriously and prepared for it. They are like The Unicorn as sung by The Irish Rovers.
The bottom line is the Europeans have made their decision and it was a bad one. Now that they are waking up from their hangover and beginning to realize how ban it was, they are demanding we bail them out. Nope.
Europe's elite has been operating on a cargo cult of 'international cooperation' signalling, as magical thinking that ensures (in their eyes) peace. They think that they need to sync to Moscow, Bejing, DC, or Brussels instead of evaluating whether their own domestic peace is holding, and what domestic policy means for that.
'International cooperation' signalling on environmental policy is directly causing European funding of Russia's ambitions.
America's domestic situation has been fraught for a while, and it is impossible for anyone who knows the culture and grudges to think that 'international cooperation' signalling has any meaning where US domestic security and peace are concerned. 'Peace through strength' mindset is one necessary element. Another is actual deliverables, ignoring the messaging cosmetics.
Nobody who engages with the academic theory model of US domestic politics is entirely correct.
The normal intuitive view is more correct, and tells us that Mexico correlates to some serious problems, and that the Democrats and left are screwing us over.
Yes, Russia is our enemy, and we probably will have to exterminate them, eventually. But, the Democrats have fucked us up too much for that to matter.
If Putin runs amok in Europe while we deal with the Democrats, that is maybe a tolerable situation for Americans. We have to deal with enemies domestic first, because they have the logistics to hurt us, and the Russians seem to not have nukes, and may not have the ability to repair their nukes before we can restore our expeditionary forces to usable order.
Putin's intentions are bad, and will always be bad, much as with, say, the Comanche. Or the IJA/IJN.
Capabilities matter, and a) Russia has less ability to kill Americans than the Cartels do b) the Democrats have screwed the internal trust that we needed for using our hardware.
Democrat intentions are as disqualifying of peace with them as Putin's intentions are as disqualifying of peace with him. The Europeans found Biden more congenial, and that says everything about their intentions.
Biden and Swalwell were outright stating the theory/intention that under Democrats, the US government would use airstrikes on domestic targets. Now, it does not matter that in reality, this would lose them the civil war fairly immediately. Procuring replacement munitions is a questionable choice so long as Democrats have influence on federal government and on the officers of the uniformed military services.
but, the totalitarian speech control pursued in the US makes this expensive to say, and stupidly buying Putinist shit is much much cheaper.
You should expect conservatives to refuse to meet you anywhere, if you first refuse to meet them halfway by recognizing that the American communists cannot be legitimate, and are fundametnally in violation of the basic peace deal.
And finally, btw, the PRC imports about 85% of its fossil fuels - oil, natural gas, from abroad, and a lot of it goes through the Straits of Malacca - which can easily be interdicted - this is why Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands is so important. And PRC also imports about 80% of its food since its soil is so contaminated. Of course, the PRC could just march into Russia's Far East and take it - and Russia - unlike in 1969 when the PRC tried last - might have a tough time kicking them out.
What pisses me off more than the lefty loonies are those you are supposedly in T’s camp call for Hegseth’s and Waltz’s resignation. They seem to be of the belief that people of their rank are the ones who set up everything for the meeting.
I asked one and will do so here too for the record about the following true to life scenario. 5 years my universities and vocational schools scrambled to come up with a way to hold classes. Most when with some kind of online class format. My experience doing so was zero. Each school has multiple people whom I have never met who set up and maintained their unique online environment. If a staff member mis set a setting and the class ended up be broadcast to any one who cared to see it or to a single individual who was not connected with the school, should I be fired? Should I resign?
That is similar to the situation within the Signal nonsense. Whoever chased it needs to be identified and dealt with as you say.
Something has been niggling at the back of my mind about this whole thing. And you just cleared it up for me with, "European leaders currently gathered to see how to square the circle on Ukraine need to read that and think about what it means. When Trump, Vance and co. talk about Europe not spending enough on defense and wondering why they should bother to rescue Europe this is what they mean."
This whole kerfuffle has been overblown IMO. And I would certainly think that the administration has been emphasizing to Europe just how important it is for them to up their defense spending, especially for their navies. But what if this is just another clueX4 and Goldberg was intentionally added to the chat so he _would_ expose it for all to see. And by all, I mean our European allies, because they haven't been taking the problem seriously enough. It seems far fetched to me for Trump to do, but I could also see someone in his administration thinking steps ahead and using this as just another part of the carrot/stick incentives. So far his admin has been pretty well schooled on processes that will end up defining things for decades to come.
This whole thing was a setup, unless you think the administration is completely incompetent. Seeing as how well they kept the opening game of January-February quiet I don’t think their opsec would be so bad unless intended to use Goldberg as their useful idiot.
The Trump team has been very capable and continue to impress, but staff people may not be so reliable. Something is definitely off about this and I suspect a set up because it seems to be an opportunistic leak timed to take advantage of the senate committee hearings. Goldsternblumberg did not publish right away. He held it for maximum embarrassment of the Trump team at the hearings. It's also interesting that within a day everyone knew it was Waltz's fault, but blamed Hegseth. We're not that far removed from Vindman listening to classified conversations and then leaking. Inviting Goldblumbergstein "by mistake" may have been the best opportunity to take advantage of the senate hearings.
What I like is that although VP Vance is not 100 percent on board with the President's foreign policy (IMO he's missing some nuances, some of which streamfortyseven points out); he nonetheless publicly backs his boss to the hilt and soldiers on. Also his objections (in private) to the policy are cogent and impersonal. Then he returns to doing what the boss says. The man is a better choice for VP than I even dreamed of.
I think one reason the left is so whacked out about "Signalgate" is what you see is a group of highly talented professionals doing a bang up job for our country.
Something is very off in this whole thing. The chat starts of with them talking about, first the need to do it then it moved to discussing if it should happen then or a month from then. In either case, the President would have a 24 hour window to give the go ahead to aborting it. This gave the eavesdropper a 2 hour notice of the attack and later those in chat discuss the effects of the attack……. How long was this chat? What am I missing?
This was a venue for one slice of a conversation, that occurred also in other venues more appropriate to the information only discussed in those venues.
So, first some key figures shared a list of their subordinates who would be doing the heavy lifting of hammering those details out. Their subordinates met, hammered stuff out, reported back up, and many convos running through Trump.
Then this venue was considered important for a discussion about reservations Vance had.
They had that discussion. And, while that was happening, Trump told his subordinates (who he had directed to investigate this proposed course of action), to go ahead with the action.
Then the actions were carried out, and Hegseth used this venue to talk about the high level view of what had happened.
(Note, this summary is from reading another version of the screenshots elsewhere)
The intelligence failures on the side of European leadership are interesting, in terms of them being surprised at all that Americans are culturally alien to them, and do not interpret actions in the same way.
The content of the Signal 'leak' seemed to me mainly important in potentially clarifying that some Americans do not share the perceptions that many University trained Europeans have.
There is still a key understanding unclarified, in that broadly, Americans do not share certain perceptions that University trained Europeans often have.
For a Yale Law grad, Vance is - as are most US conservatives - amazingly shortsighted and perhaps outright ignorant of Putin and his long game that he's been playing since 2004 - look at the references to Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics, here: https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/russias-new-peace-proposal-to-ukraine - and if you want the full picture, read the full 16-page Dunlop article from 2004(!): https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics Trying to get conservatives, even nominally intelligent ones, to read this, even if you print it out and stick it in their faces is nearly impossible, I know, I've tried. They seem to prefer Ritter, Carlson, and Colonel MacGregor, and the Russian Foreign Ministry talking points they spew out in great profusion - good sound bites, little information content - to reading 16 page articles which blow those three useful fools out of the water. It's incredibly frustrating - and you'd think that Trump and Vance's national security people would be aware of this - but apparently not, you get the same useful fool talking points from them, too. The part of the Dunlop article to look at is the part which mentions the "Moscow-Teheran Axis".
As for Waltz, he said something in his taking of responsibility that makes this seem like a hack - or plain subterfuge: "Have you ever had somebody’s contact that shows their name and then you have somebody else’s number there?… Of course I didn’t see this loser in the group. It looked like someone else." I spoke with a friend who is familiar with Signal, and it turns out that you can change your screen name to anything you want - your phone number stays the same. So Waltz or his staffer accepts Goldberg into the group, thinking that it's someone who is legit - and he or his staffer doesn't check the phone number... So Goldberg spoofed Waltz - if this is the case - and after Goldberg is done with the chat, he can just change his name back to his real name - and he has plausible deniability. Waltz said at one point that one of the people in the group chat didn't receive any of the messages in the chat - and this would confirm the spoofing. And that means that Signal as it stands now is *very* insecure - for anyone who needs to maintain confidentiality - there needs to be some sort of code put in to stop this kid of spoofing.
Regarding Signal and name changing. Signal isn't the only app that allows that sort of thing. In fact in Whatsapp group chats it can very hard to see the actual phone# of people who aren't direct contacts, you just get what they want you to see (and when the name is Arabic and you don't read Arabic that can be fun).
I think there's a way to force the display on your device to be your name for the contact in Signal as opposed to the name chosen by that person, but I'm not enough of a signal user to be sure.
I wouldn't use Whatsapp on a bet, it's closed source, so you can't check it - and it's a Meta product which means that it probably has backdoors. It's free, but so is the cheese in a mouse trap. And I doubt that any of the people in the WH - except perhaps for Elon Musk - have the technical knowledge to defeat spoofing. I'll bet that they all d/l'ed the app from the AppStore. If they want a secure copy, it's not that difficult, just download the source, clean up the dodgy stuff, put in anti-spoofing code (a whitelist of names and phone numbers, or a phone directory lookup), and using Xcode, compile, link, and produce the iOS app.
Regarding Vance etc. and Putin. I read your previous post and I agree. I see no way for Eastern Europe to have stability while Russia exists in its current large form. Hence, as I've said at various times, my desired end goal is to see Russia broken up
The way things are going, that breakup may happen anyway, the Old Russian part may well lose its imperial colonies that they inherited from the Soviet Union, and before that, Imperial Russia. And this is because Putin has avoided, like the plague, using ethnic Russians from the Moscow - St Petersburg - Voronezh - Orel areas, because there would be a revolt. Instead, he uses the various non-ethnic Russian indigenous colonized people for his cannon fodder. Their cemeteries are filling up, and their patience is wearing thin, as is their support. An as time goes on, Putin is going to have less and less capability of projecting force to keep the colonies from leaving...
“What the master intends and what the master does will be as different as white knight to black bishop”.
Putin’s plans matter far less treat Russia’s capabilities. But whatever either are, it is not the US’s problem. If Europe had taken as much care of their Defence as they demand the US does, they would not be in this situation. They made their bed, they can lie in it.
Europe's problems eventually cross the ocean - after all, it was Hitler, under the Axis Pact, who declared war on the US on December 11, 1941. If he had not done so, it's unclear whether the US would have gotten into the war with Nazi Germany - Hitler had lots of ties to the US including Coca Cola, Disney (Hitler owned property in Los Angeles), IBM, and Ford Motor Company - Hitler had a life-size portrait of Henry Ford behind his desk in the Reichskanzlerei, and was a fan of Ford's since 1922, when the latter published a book entitled "The International Jew". Most of Hitler's ideas about Eugenics came from the US - see https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php
As for Putin, he's been bogged down in Ukraine for over three years, he's attempting to get by negotiations, deception, propaganda, and subterfuge, what he cannot get by military force. He will be lucky if China doesn't make a play for Russia's Far East, especially if the Straits of Malacca get cut off and the oil supply interdicted - and if China does make that play, it's doubtful that the Russian Army will be able to do much about it. Putin badly needs a break in hostilities, to re-man and rearm his rather depleted forces. His "peace negotiations" are no more than a play for time, Ukraine ought to keep him busy instead - "Sun Tzu advises, "If he is taking his ease, give him no rest." This means to keep your opponent constantly engaged and prevent them from having any respite, thereby weakening them over time."
But leaving Europe and Ukraine in the lurch isn't a good idea - Ukraine is doing a hell of a good job with our 30-year old materiel and munitions that formerly were headed to the junkyard - and our intel allows Ukraine to see where the Russian threats are coming from - and they're doing their part with drones warfare - see https://mickryan.substack.com/p/ukraine-strikes-back-hard
We are not leaving them in the lurch. We are refusing to come to the aid of spoiled brats who refused to take care of their own safety and are now demanding we do it for them. Help? Yes. Do? NO!.
.Yes, of course, a cessation in hostilities is just time for Putin to rearm. And? Ukraine bogged him down. In what universe will he ever have the resources to take on NATO? The US? Especially give the threat from China? Doesn’t mean he wont’ try, but he not going to be able to take all of Europe unless they want him to, and I am not sure they don’t.
And you would be well advised to read this - it's what Putin has been following since 2004:
Putin is also following what Aleksandr Dugin wrote in his Foundations of Geopolitics from 1997, again for which no reliable English translation is available, although a good summary of the main points is available. Most notably, as to Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus:
“As for the former union republics of the USSR situated within Europe, they all, in Dugin's view, (with the exception of Estonia) should be absorbed by Eurasia-Russia. "Belorussia," Dugin asserts flatly, "should be seen as a part of Russia" (377). In similar fashion, Moldova is seen as a part of what Dugin calls "the Russian South" (343).
On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions," he warns, "represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics" (348). And he adds that, "[T]he independent existence of Ukraine (especially within its present borders) can make sense only as a 'sanitary cordon'" (379). However, as we have seen, for Dugin all such "sanitary cordons" are inadmissible.
Dugin speculates that three extreme western regions of Ukraine--Volynia, Galicia, and Trans- Carpathia--heavily populated with Uniates and other Catholics, could be permitted to form an independent "Western Ukrainian Federation." But this area must not under any circumstances be permitted to fall under Atlanticist control (382). With the exception of these three western regions, Ukraine, like Belorussia, is seen as an integral part of Eurasia-Russia.
At one point in his book, Dugin confides that all arrangements made with "the Eurasian bloc of the continental West," headed by Germany, will be merely temporary and provisional in nature. "The maximum task [of the future]," he underscores, "is the 'Finlandization' of all of Europe" (369).” (page number references are to the Russian version of Foundations of Geopolitics.)
As to the United States, Western Europe, and NATO - which Dugin refers to as“the Atlanticists”:
“One way in which Russia will be able to turn other states against Atlanticism will be an astute use of the country's raw material riches. "In the beginning stage [of the struggle against Atlanticism]," Dugin writes, "Russia can offer its potential partners in the East and West its resources as compensation for exacerbating their relations with the U.S." (276). To induce the Anaconda to release its grip on the coastline of Eurasia, it must be attacked relentlessly on its home territory, within its own hemisphere, and throughout Eurasia. "All levels of geopolitical pressure," Dugin insists, "must be activated simultaneously" (367).
Within the United States itself, there is a need for the Russian special services and their allies "to provoke all forms of instability and separatism within the borders of the United States (it is possible to make use of the political forces of Afro-American racists)" (248). "It is especially important," Dugin adds, "to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements-- extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics" (367).
Dugin's Eurasian project also mandates attacking the United States through Central and South America. "The Eurasian project," Dugin writes, "proposes Eurasian expansion into South and Central America with the goal of freeing them from the control of the North" (248). 48 As a result of such unrelenting destabilization efforts, the United States and its close ally Britain eventually will be forced to leave the shores of Eurasia (and Africa). "The entire gigantic edifice of Atlanticism," Dugin prophesies, "will collapse" (259). He believes that this could happen unexpectedly, as occurred with the sudden collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR. Expelled from the shores of Eurasia, the United States would then be required to "limit its influence to the Americas" (367).” Ibid.
Putin has adopted the ideas set forth by Dugin as his policy for Ukraine, Europe, NATO, the US - and the broader world, as is obvious from his military actions in Chechnya, Georgia, Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea, Moldova/Transnistria, Belarus, and now Ukraine, since 2004. Putin is playing the long game, he’s been actively at it for the past 20 years. This did not start just three years ago in 2022. The Western governments have been asleep at the switch but now they appear to be waking up, especially those in the Baltic and Balkan states - and Putin has his designs on these as well, as seen by his rhetoric and actions towards them..." https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/russias-new-peace-proposal-to-ukraine
So what. Again, “What the masters intends and does ….. “. Putin doesn’t have another 20 years. Probably not even 10. All he can accomplish to really mess things up in Europe but tho is could be prevented if the freeloading Europeans took their situation seriously and prepared for it. They are like The Unicorn as sung by The Irish Rovers.
The bottom line is the Europeans have made their decision and it was a bad one. Now that they are waking up from their hangover and beginning to realize how ban it was, they are demanding we bail them out. Nope.
Europe's elite has been operating on a cargo cult of 'international cooperation' signalling, as magical thinking that ensures (in their eyes) peace. They think that they need to sync to Moscow, Bejing, DC, or Brussels instead of evaluating whether their own domestic peace is holding, and what domestic policy means for that.
'International cooperation' signalling on environmental policy is directly causing European funding of Russia's ambitions.
America's domestic situation has been fraught for a while, and it is impossible for anyone who knows the culture and grudges to think that 'international cooperation' signalling has any meaning where US domestic security and peace are concerned. 'Peace through strength' mindset is one necessary element. Another is actual deliverables, ignoring the messaging cosmetics.
Nobody who engages with the academic theory model of US domestic politics is entirely correct.
The normal intuitive view is more correct, and tells us that Mexico correlates to some serious problems, and that the Democrats and left are screwing us over.
Yes, Russia is our enemy, and we probably will have to exterminate them, eventually. But, the Democrats have fucked us up too much for that to matter.
If Putin runs amok in Europe while we deal with the Democrats, that is maybe a tolerable situation for Americans. We have to deal with enemies domestic first, because they have the logistics to hurt us, and the Russians seem to not have nukes, and may not have the ability to repair their nukes before we can restore our expeditionary forces to usable order.
Putin's intentions are bad, and will always be bad, much as with, say, the Comanche. Or the IJA/IJN.
Capabilities matter, and a) Russia has less ability to kill Americans than the Cartels do b) the Democrats have screwed the internal trust that we needed for using our hardware.
Democrat intentions are as disqualifying of peace with them as Putin's intentions are as disqualifying of peace with him. The Europeans found Biden more congenial, and that says everything about their intentions.
Biden and Swalwell were outright stating the theory/intention that under Democrats, the US government would use airstrikes on domestic targets. Now, it does not matter that in reality, this would lose them the civil war fairly immediately. Procuring replacement munitions is a questionable choice so long as Democrats have influence on federal government and on the officers of the uniformed military services.
but, the totalitarian speech control pursued in the US makes this expensive to say, and stupidly buying Putinist shit is much much cheaper.
You should expect conservatives to refuse to meet you anywhere, if you first refuse to meet them halfway by recognizing that the American communists cannot be legitimate, and are fundametnally in violation of the basic peace deal.
And finally, btw, the PRC imports about 85% of its fossil fuels - oil, natural gas, from abroad, and a lot of it goes through the Straits of Malacca - which can easily be interdicted - this is why Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands is so important. And PRC also imports about 80% of its food since its soil is so contaminated. Of course, the PRC could just march into Russia's Far East and take it - and Russia - unlike in 1969 when the PRC tried last - might have a tough time kicking them out.
What pisses me off more than the lefty loonies are those you are supposedly in T’s camp call for Hegseth’s and Waltz’s resignation. They seem to be of the belief that people of their rank are the ones who set up everything for the meeting.
I asked one and will do so here too for the record about the following true to life scenario. 5 years my universities and vocational schools scrambled to come up with a way to hold classes. Most when with some kind of online class format. My experience doing so was zero. Each school has multiple people whom I have never met who set up and maintained their unique online environment. If a staff member mis set a setting and the class ended up be broadcast to any one who cared to see it or to a single individual who was not connected with the school, should I be fired? Should I resign?
That is similar to the situation within the Signal nonsense. Whoever chased it needs to be identified and dealt with as you say.
I suspect we will have a little more insight to what happened and why if Mr. Wong is still employed there in a month or six weeks.
as someone who had a government phone for over five years, and got it from the last guy that was issued it... NO they're not scrubbed, not at all.
Well that's totally reassuring /sarc
I don't deal in reassurance, I deal in facts and my opinions on them.
Sal - you missed the signal;
"...more variety in names? Jeffery Goldberg, Jeffery Goldstein, Jeff Goldblum..." The signal is GOLD - well up over the last year Try to keep up!!
Wishing Vance was president every day
Something has been niggling at the back of my mind about this whole thing. And you just cleared it up for me with, "European leaders currently gathered to see how to square the circle on Ukraine need to read that and think about what it means. When Trump, Vance and co. talk about Europe not spending enough on defense and wondering why they should bother to rescue Europe this is what they mean."
This whole kerfuffle has been overblown IMO. And I would certainly think that the administration has been emphasizing to Europe just how important it is for them to up their defense spending, especially for their navies. But what if this is just another clueX4 and Goldberg was intentionally added to the chat so he _would_ expose it for all to see. And by all, I mean our European allies, because they haven't been taking the problem seriously enough. It seems far fetched to me for Trump to do, but I could also see someone in his administration thinking steps ahead and using this as just another part of the carrot/stick incentives. So far his admin has been pretty well schooled on processes that will end up defining things for decades to come.
It is not at all impossible that this was the case. It would explain the plausible deniability used an underling thing.
This whole thing was a setup, unless you think the administration is completely incompetent. Seeing as how well they kept the opening game of January-February quiet I don’t think their opsec would be so bad unless intended to use Goldberg as their useful idiot.
The Trump team has been very capable and continue to impress, but staff people may not be so reliable. Something is definitely off about this and I suspect a set up because it seems to be an opportunistic leak timed to take advantage of the senate committee hearings. Goldsternblumberg did not publish right away. He held it for maximum embarrassment of the Trump team at the hearings. It's also interesting that within a day everyone knew it was Waltz's fault, but blamed Hegseth. We're not that far removed from Vindman listening to classified conversations and then leaking. Inviting Goldblumbergstein "by mistake" may have been the best opportunity to take advantage of the senate hearings.
Even if it’s a mistake Trump has a way to capitalize on one ala “Trump Boomerang” effect.
What I like is that although VP Vance is not 100 percent on board with the President's foreign policy (IMO he's missing some nuances, some of which streamfortyseven points out); he nonetheless publicly backs his boss to the hilt and soldiers on. Also his objections (in private) to the policy are cogent and impersonal. Then he returns to doing what the boss says. The man is a better choice for VP than I even dreamed of.
I think one reason the left is so whacked out about "Signalgate" is what you see is a group of highly talented professionals doing a bang up job for our country.
Something is very off in this whole thing. The chat starts of with them talking about, first the need to do it then it moved to discussing if it should happen then or a month from then. In either case, the President would have a 24 hour window to give the go ahead to aborting it. This gave the eavesdropper a 2 hour notice of the attack and later those in chat discuss the effects of the attack……. How long was this chat? What am I missing?
Should have been over many days.
This was a venue for one slice of a conversation, that occurred also in other venues more appropriate to the information only discussed in those venues.
So, first some key figures shared a list of their subordinates who would be doing the heavy lifting of hammering those details out. Their subordinates met, hammered stuff out, reported back up, and many convos running through Trump.
Then this venue was considered important for a discussion about reservations Vance had.
They had that discussion. And, while that was happening, Trump told his subordinates (who he had directed to investigate this proposed course of action), to go ahead with the action.
Then the actions were carried out, and Hegseth used this venue to talk about the high level view of what had happened.
(Note, this summary is from reading another version of the screenshots elsewhere)
Thanks.
Concur.
The intelligence failures on the side of European leadership are interesting, in terms of them being surprised at all that Americans are culturally alien to them, and do not interpret actions in the same way.
The content of the Signal 'leak' seemed to me mainly important in potentially clarifying that some Americans do not share the perceptions that many University trained Europeans have.
There is still a key understanding unclarified, in that broadly, Americans do not share certain perceptions that University trained Europeans often have.