Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Terry Maloney who wrote (487091)	2/27/2022 5:47:31 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541043

I've copied the original post we are referring to below. What this 30 year Indian diplomat is doing is being hoodwinked by Putin's claims of deescalation (which happened repeatedly) while at the same time Biden was releasing info indicating that war was coming, and then this clown, having been hoodwinked, has the cajones to turn around and claim the war only happened because this Biden induced "war hysteria" is what drove Putin to actually launch the war. The first two paragraphs below indicate that this clown actually believed Putin. Why would he be that stupid? The next two paragraphs then claim its all the fault of the "war hysteria" and he belittles the intelligence that was in fact 100% correct. Now which narrative do you believe: 1) Putin was building up forces for a war, and he used every excuse to deflect to gain a little more cover and time for his buildup, including playing Macron for a fool, and then finally launched the attack when his forces were ready, meanwhile, Biden had reasonable Intel, and was warning about what was most likely to actually happen, including calling the time for the start quite closely. or 2) Putin really wanted to deescalate, but Biden's Intel was all BS and the USA was just fanning war hysteria, and this forced Putin into starting the war he didn't want? Hint: The above is not a trick question there is a very obvious answer. US war hysteria over Ukraine won’t gel The two takeaways out of the French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Moscow and his six-hour long talks with President Vladimir Putin have been the assurance held out by the latter that Russian forces would not ramp up the crisis near Ukraine’s borders — “there would be no deterioration or escalation” — and second, an agreement that Russia would pull troops out of Belarus at the end of exercises taking place currently near Ukraine’s northern borders. The very fact of the French side putting such sensitive details in the public domain suggests that Moscow sees nothing wrong in it. Moscow has simply clarified that the redeployment of troops out of Belarus is not to be construed as any “deal” with France. The paradox is, instead of working on these crucial assurances from Moscow, Washington has since chosen to travel in the opposite direction with the White House orchestrating a war hysteria through last week. President Biden and his advisor Jake Sullivan have conjured up an apocalyptic scenario. The White House claims it has intelligence but dodges details. All we have are some satellite imagery from Max (which works for US intelligence). The patchy details have led to Biden speculating about a world war! Meanwhile, the Biden Administration is creating diplomatic synergy out of the war hysteria. On Friday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken made an audacious bid to hustle the US’ QUAD partners to endorse Washington’s allegations of Russia’s “aggression” — although the group has nothing to do with European security issues. ... ... Fundamentally, the US has no intentions of giving Russia the security guarantee it needs. For, NATO’s eastward expansion and encirclement of Russia happens to be Washington’s core agenda. And, since 2014, that agenda has been so far advanced that there is no turning point now. It must be carried forward to its logical conclusion. The Washington elites realise that the US lacks the capability to take on China and Russia simultaneously. A paradigm shift is needed. In the US calculus, forcing Putin to abdicate after a humiliating retreat over Ukraine and a severe weakening of Russian military power only can bring about the strategic rollback of Russia’s resurgence and its alliance with China. It is, therefore, an imperative first step on the pathway to an eventual epochal confrontation with China, which poses a formidable challenge to America’s global hegemony in the 21st century.