Not just that, but they operate from a space of seemingly studied incuriosity about the status quo. For example, as I understand it, Musk and his dorks have been given control of US Data Services which was set up by the Obama admin to conduct audits and similar stuff not that far removed from the steel-manned version of what Trump (and Musk) say they want to do.
I am sure Musk and co. are making a total hash of this, operating in a manner of total incompetence and corruption. But it all begs questions like 'what was US Data Services doing before January of 2025? Did they ever uncover waste or abuse? Is every penny the federal government is spending truly beyond reproach? What about the inspector generals? Do we know they were all doing a good job?'
The WaPo is fundamentally incapable of asking questions like that, everyone knows it, and the result isn't even the view from nowhere, it's the view from a presumption of authority no one actually recognizes.
I don't think it's whataboutism. I think that media outlets like WaPo have either decided not to, or their worldview simply precludes, the ability to interrogate the assertions of particular officials and institutions. This causes a lot of their criticism of Trump, much of which is warranted, to fall flat.
My understanding is that the launch codes were always in Moscow and that while the weapons were stationed in Ukraine the Ukrainian state never had the ability to use or maintain them.
I think what we're seeing now is the testing of those agreements that from Russia's perspective were made under duress. Some level of revanchism was probably inevitable even after nominal independence. Our own wasn't totally secure for decades and decades after we had it on paper.
I haven't seen anything with better context but I read it as being about shortcomings in either US logistics or procurement, not necessarily corruption.
I'm not quite sure that's right. I would say we had something like 50 years of nationalistic expansionism and consolidation followed by another 50 years of tense mostly peace underwritten by coherent mutual defense alliances and mutually assured destruction. We then had about 20 years of US unipolarity. Now we have to figure out what comes next.
I think the natural first order results of a sphere of influence approach is that a dozen or more countries immediately develop nuclear weapons as their only guarantee of continued sovereignty and a couple dozen more involved in some low intensity ethnic and/or territorial conflict or another rationally conclude this is their moment to strike so they'd better take it. If that's what we're nevertheless going to say is the best option then we need to be really, really confident we've thought through how all of that plays out. I am not convinced anyone has.
What is your position on what US strategy should be? Something other than indefinite support is understandable and hey I'd agree with that. But are you saying we just concede it as Russia's sphere of influence? Something similar?
Nah I wasn't accusing you personally of that, sorry it came off that way. Big picture I agree with you about the deterioration of the NATO deterrent due to untenable expansion.
Read my previous comment as frustration about the state of the debate. I don't think NATO membership was ever a plausible solution to Ukraine but I'm also pretty convinced that neither Vance nor Hegseth appreciate the perils of getting Ukraine wrong (ironically based on a kind of Greenwaldian/Gabbardian inability to understand that different situations call for different strategies) and I think there's a decent chance that's about to happen.
I think there's a good possibility that if European security wasn't 'NATO or bust' then maybe this doesn't happen. However now that it has I agree that the path to resolution needs to be something short of NATO that still creates a serious deterrent to future Russian incursions.
This is where I will be kind of mean to what IMHO is a serious deterioration in the realism of the Realist community. Just like it was always 1938 for the Neocons I think the Realists have entered a similarly current events agnostic cul-de-sac where it's perpetually 2002.
All I can think of is the baseline to the Megadeth song.
But bigger picture and beyond whatever happens with Ukraine, the US and the West generally may need to re-arm. We got a 30 year break which was nice even if we kind of squandered it. I'm not sure anyone is taking the situation seriously from a fiscal or strategic perspective. We've got all this bitching and moaning about giving away a bunch of old, obsolete kit gathering dust when the real problem is that projections suggest we'd run out of ammo for basic weapons systems in days or weeks in the event of a conflict with a real adversary.
I think the chances of people complaining about selling weapons is low, especially if a lot of them are made here. At the end of the day that's what this proposal would come down to.
But sure there are a lot of really naive people in America who think we can have all of the upside of Pax Americana and none of the costs. At best they're penny wise pound foolish.
I think the time between when they wanted to join to when they felt they actually could (or maybe had no choice but to make it official) was around 70 years.
The truth is that there is no baby, only bath water. It all must be banished. The only thing that's sad is that it took election of a totally unfit for office asshat to do it.
I don't know about indefinitely, but you have to create a plausible long-term deterrent. I don't know if it was due to age or just lack of vision but the best time to push for something was probably just before Ukraine's failed counter offensive.
Anyway at this point it doesn't mean that it's wrong to negotiate. It does mean though that the deal can't be something like 'Ukraine gives up its east and everyone promises to play nice from now on.' It might be something like there's a demilitarized zone and Rheinmetal builds a bunch of arms factories on Ukrainian soil, all of Europe and in particular Poland is allowed to export indefinite weapons (Ukraine can of course build its own too) so long as those arms don't cross whatever line, and the US is permitted to install a modern air defense system and provide ammunition and logistical support for it.
I think you're being too reductive, which may well be downstream of the politics created by the Biden admin's apparent lack of strategic thinking.
The question facing the US is whether any settlement with Russia at this moment can result not just in a temporary halt to hostilities but in sustainable peace. If we cut off support to Ukraine and Russia rebuilds and comes back in a few years, like what's happened previously, then it wasn't really peace to begin with. And if that happens, it opens the possibility that the conflict expands to NATO countries which in turn forces us to decide whether mutual defense is real or a bluff. That position is a no win whichever direction we go because we're either in a hot war with a nuclear armed adversary or we've removed ourselves from relevance as a major world power.
So while we need to be cautious about escalations the idea that we can just walk away from this isn't born out by the strategic realities.
Yea a buddy of mine was working for one of the public high schools and he mentioned to me at the end of the 2022-2023 school year that they were all nervous because no one but the about to graduate seniors had ever experienced a normal, in person exam week. Something about that specific example struck me as really eye opening. As grown ups it's easy to forget just how short a time period these big milestone parts of childhood/growing up are.
I remember that urban legend. Hadn't thought about it in a million years. It occurs to me that one of the kind of sad things about the internet is the loss of little myths like that. Some might celebrate that but I think it's part of what makes us human.
Anyway as for us my wife and I had a little valentines date on the couch. We watched Babygirl which was another meh on a long string of movies from which I'd had higher expectations. Is it just me or have movies become too intentional in their ambiguity, especially in the endings? You get the sense that even the writers and directors don't have their own theory of what happened, they just ran out of run time.
Today the older son has a basketball game then going to log some volunteer hours at the school. Tomorrow more children's sports and a birthday party but they're spending the night at my mother in law's after and having their Monday off at her house. No holidays for me in techno-capitalist America but my wife has promised to make some old fashions while we get ANOTHER adult date night. I think we will probably get started on White Lotus season 3.
On “From Vox: How Democrats should respond to Trump’s war on DEI”
The name for it is DEI.
On “Bull-DOGEing Government”
I think this is all fair enough but a credible conversation is only possible when it excludes tax cuts.
DOGE is fairly criticized as unserious until such time as Trump/the GOP drop those from the budget proposal.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/17/2025”
Cowabunga.
On “From Washington Post: The Trump Lexicon”
Yea I think the US press is way too cozy with power.
"
Not just that, but they operate from a space of seemingly studied incuriosity about the status quo. For example, as I understand it, Musk and his dorks have been given control of US Data Services which was set up by the Obama admin to conduct audits and similar stuff not that far removed from the steel-manned version of what Trump (and Musk) say they want to do.
I am sure Musk and co. are making a total hash of this, operating in a manner of total incompetence and corruption. But it all begs questions like 'what was US Data Services doing before January of 2025? Did they ever uncover waste or abuse? Is every penny the federal government is spending truly beyond reproach? What about the inspector generals? Do we know they were all doing a good job?'
The WaPo is fundamentally incapable of asking questions like that, everyone knows it, and the result isn't even the view from nowhere, it's the view from a presumption of authority no one actually recognizes.
"
I don't think it's whataboutism. I think that media outlets like WaPo have either decided not to, or their worldview simply precludes, the ability to interrogate the assertions of particular officials and institutions. This causes a lot of their criticism of Trump, much of which is warranted, to fall flat.
On “Beware: Promises Being Kept”
My understanding is that the launch codes were always in Moscow and that while the weapons were stationed in Ukraine the Ukrainian state never had the ability to use or maintain them.
I think what we're seeing now is the testing of those agreements that from Russia's perspective were made under duress. Some level of revanchism was probably inevitable even after nominal independence. Our own wasn't totally secure for decades and decades after we had it on paper.
"
This is the claim.
https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-has-received-less-than-half-of-us-assistance-allocated-during-full-scale-war-zelensky-says/
I haven't seen anything with better context but I read it as being about shortcomings in either US logistics or procurement, not necessarily corruption.
"
I'm not quite sure that's right. I would say we had something like 50 years of nationalistic expansionism and consolidation followed by another 50 years of tense mostly peace underwritten by coherent mutual defense alliances and mutually assured destruction. We then had about 20 years of US unipolarity. Now we have to figure out what comes next.
I think the natural first order results of a sphere of influence approach is that a dozen or more countries immediately develop nuclear weapons as their only guarantee of continued sovereignty and a couple dozen more involved in some low intensity ethnic and/or territorial conflict or another rationally conclude this is their moment to strike so they'd better take it. If that's what we're nevertheless going to say is the best option then we need to be really, really confident we've thought through how all of that plays out. I am not convinced anyone has.
"
What is your position on what US strategy should be? Something other than indefinite support is understandable and hey I'd agree with that. But are you saying we just concede it as Russia's sphere of influence? Something similar?
"
Nah I wasn't accusing you personally of that, sorry it came off that way. Big picture I agree with you about the deterioration of the NATO deterrent due to untenable expansion.
Read my previous comment as frustration about the state of the debate. I don't think NATO membership was ever a plausible solution to Ukraine but I'm also pretty convinced that neither Vance nor Hegseth appreciate the perils of getting Ukraine wrong (ironically based on a kind of Greenwaldian/Gabbardian inability to understand that different situations call for different strategies) and I think there's a decent chance that's about to happen.
"
I think there's a good possibility that if European security wasn't 'NATO or bust' then maybe this doesn't happen. However now that it has I agree that the path to resolution needs to be something short of NATO that still creates a serious deterrent to future Russian incursions.
This is where I will be kind of mean to what IMHO is a serious deterioration in the realism of the Realist community. Just like it was always 1938 for the Neocons I think the Realists have entered a similarly current events agnostic cul-de-sac where it's perpetually 2002.
"
All I can think of is the baseline to the Megadeth song.
But bigger picture and beyond whatever happens with Ukraine, the US and the West generally may need to re-arm. We got a 30 year break which was nice even if we kind of squandered it. I'm not sure anyone is taking the situation seriously from a fiscal or strategic perspective. We've got all this bitching and moaning about giving away a bunch of old, obsolete kit gathering dust when the real problem is that projections suggest we'd run out of ammo for basic weapons systems in days or weeks in the event of a conflict with a real adversary.
"
I think the chances of people complaining about selling weapons is low, especially if a lot of them are made here. At the end of the day that's what this proposal would come down to.
But sure there are a lot of really naive people in America who think we can have all of the upside of Pax Americana and none of the costs. At best they're penny wise pound foolish.
"
I think the time between when they wanted to join to when they felt they actually could (or maybe had no choice but to make it official) was around 70 years.
On “From Vox: How Democrats should respond to Trump’s war on DEI”
The truth is that there is no baby, only bath water. It all must be banished. The only thing that's sad is that it took election of a totally unfit for office asshat to do it.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/10/2025”
This has a distinctly nottheonion vibe.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-administration-wants-un-fire-nuclear-safety-workers-cant-figure-rcna192345
On “Beware: Promises Being Kept”
This is a nice thought but it will almost certainly never happen, or if it does, the timeline will be similar to Finland's entry into NATO.
"
I don't know about indefinitely, but you have to create a plausible long-term deterrent. I don't know if it was due to age or just lack of vision but the best time to push for something was probably just before Ukraine's failed counter offensive.
Anyway at this point it doesn't mean that it's wrong to negotiate. It does mean though that the deal can't be something like 'Ukraine gives up its east and everyone promises to play nice from now on.' It might be something like there's a demilitarized zone and Rheinmetal builds a bunch of arms factories on Ukrainian soil, all of Europe and in particular Poland is allowed to export indefinite weapons (Ukraine can of course build its own too) so long as those arms don't cross whatever line, and the US is permitted to install a modern air defense system and provide ammunition and logistical support for it.
"
I think you're being too reductive, which may well be downstream of the politics created by the Biden admin's apparent lack of strategic thinking.
The question facing the US is whether any settlement with Russia at this moment can result not just in a temporary halt to hostilities but in sustainable peace. If we cut off support to Ukraine and Russia rebuilds and comes back in a few years, like what's happened previously, then it wasn't really peace to begin with. And if that happens, it opens the possibility that the conflict expands to NATO countries which in turn forces us to decide whether mutual defense is real or a bluff. That position is a no win whichever direction we go because we're either in a hot war with a nuclear armed adversary or we've removed ourselves from relevance as a major world power.
So while we need to be cautious about escalations the idea that we can just walk away from this isn't born out by the strategic realities.
On “Weekend Plans Post: The Tootsie Roll Pop Indian”
Yea a buddy of mine was working for one of the public high schools and he mentioned to me at the end of the 2022-2023 school year that they were all nervous because no one but the about to graduate seniors had ever experienced a normal, in person exam week. Something about that specific example struck me as really eye opening. As grown ups it's easy to forget just how short a time period these big milestone parts of childhood/growing up are.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/10/2025”
Seems reasonable to me.
"
Sterilizing oneself for political reasons has always struck me as kind of a self own.
On “Weekend Plans Post: The Tootsie Roll Pop Indian”
I remember that urban legend. Hadn't thought about it in a million years. It occurs to me that one of the kind of sad things about the internet is the loss of little myths like that. Some might celebrate that but I think it's part of what makes us human.
Anyway as for us my wife and I had a little valentines date on the couch. We watched Babygirl which was another meh on a long string of movies from which I'd had higher expectations. Is it just me or have movies become too intentional in their ambiguity, especially in the endings? You get the sense that even the writers and directors don't have their own theory of what happened, they just ran out of run time.
Today the older son has a basketball game then going to log some volunteer hours at the school. Tomorrow more children's sports and a birthday party but they're spending the night at my mother in law's after and having their Monday off at her house. No holidays for me in techno-capitalist America but my wife has promised to make some old fashions while we get ANOTHER adult date night. I think we will probably get started on White Lotus season 3.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/10/2025”
Heh then I suppose they have nothing to worry about and I'm sure nothing remotely damaging will come out of discovery.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.