All Things Russia & Ukraine

[old salt]

Two more Jews for your blood of children drinking dinner parties in the international cabal.

Got it.

Make it 3. Enjoy this from the brightest at the NeoCon dinner party kiddee table. (I'm a big fan of his, btw)

https://www.commentary.org/john-podhore ... rn-crisis/

It's unfortunate that you can't have an honest discussion without playing the race/religion card.
It's a sign of intellectual weakness & a form of bigotry all it's own.
I agreed with the neocons during the Cold War, but they went too far in the aftermath.

Sorry, you don't get to skate by simply naming one more Jew and claiming "race/religion card" by someone.
These were the folks you put at the "dinner parties where they control the course of history".
Surely there are some non-Jews in your international cabal?

This exchange began with you making an argument in favor of a white Christian nationalist imperialist war criminal and his kleptocracy being rewarded for their aggression against a neighbor trying to move toward western values and democracy and defending their land and their people from atrocities.

With a claim that Ukraine should have taken the path of Belarus, then citing 3 people (just coincidentally) of Jewish Eastern European background as somehow the enemy of what, peace and prosperity, for Christian Eastern Europeans?

Was this all unconscious?

You're the one who introduced religion. I was not even aware that Nuland & Applebaum are Jewish. I don't check that when evaluating someone's position. I know that Applebaum married a Polish politician. There'd be a greater chance that they're Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.
I only know that Soros is because bigots like you cry anti-semitism whenever he's criticized.
I suppose I could find some gentile NeoCons, ...if I gave a sh!t or it mattered to anyone other than you & your fellow race baiters.

Ok, so it was simply "unconscious" that you just happened to choose 3 people with Eastern European Jewish heritage in your "dinner parties where they control the course of history" in reference to a conspiratorial plan in Belarus...(what, to encourage the overthrow of another white christian nationalist dictator?)

I guessed their likely background simply from the trope you employed...as you've done so many times in the past. Took one minute to confirm.
Nuland's parents were Jewish Ukrainian immigrants, Applebaum's family, Jewish Reformed, is originally from Belarus.

But ok, it's "unconscious"...perhaps you are just repeating what you hear others say, who are utilizing these tropes?

But after these many times that I've pointed out to you the through line of anti-semitism in these tropes and how they've been utilized historically continuing through to today by fascist populists, perhaps you could stir yourself to bother to avoid them?

Or not.

I have a tough time giving you an automatic pass, given that the specific use of Soros as the emblem of this trope (in prior eras it might have been "Rothschild") you admit you know well...so, you chose to employ it again, invoking this gruesome bigotry.

Here's the thing, if you really didn't intend this offensive, bigoted meaning.
I dunno how many of our fellow readers on here are Jewish, but I have to assume some are, and many others object as well...a simple apology would be a start and a promise to do one's best to avoid such mistakes going forward.

Or you can choose not to do so.

I chose Soros, Nuland & Applebaum because of their public record. Their actions, writings & statements.
Their heritage or religion is of no concern to me unless they make it a part of their position. It is irrelevant.
I was unaware of their religion or if they are observant. I've made no reference or implication to their religion or heritage.
I offer no one an apology. To do so would be patronizing. I'm not going to self-censor based on religion when it is irrelevant.
Your hypersensitivity by proxy is laughable. Tragic history of previous generations does not exempt anyone from critque.
I doubt that neocons represent the majority opinion of Jewish Americans, but that, too, is irrelevant.

Yes, the latter at the end would indeed be irrelevant.

But when you refer to conspiracies and "dinner parties where they control the course of history" and then, just coincidentally, name 3 people, including one you know is frequently claimed by white nationalists as the center of such global Jewish led conspiracies, well, you just have to know better...

And I think you do know. You're neither stupid nor ignorant.

Did you not know the heritage of the other two and this was just a mistake? I'd be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, though it's lazy not to have understood the implications given the reference made and the context.

But we all get intellectually lazy at times, we all make mistakes.

Unfortunately, it's not surprising that you wouldn't apologize for this mistake.

It's an interesting thing learned in kindergarten, apologizing for a mistake, an offense given, but one you seem to not have learned or have un-learned since.

Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential. I don't question their good intentions. I agree with much of what they espouse. Their intentions are noble. Even when I disagree, I admire their eloquence & humor. I part with them when (imho) they overreach & bring us negative unintended consequences.
You should lose your kindergarten sensitivity. We're all adults here.

The influence wielded by George Soros is not a conspiracy or trope. His record of results demonstrates his relevancy.
His religion does not exempt him from critique.

Applebaum used her dinner party as a literary device. She IS extremely influential. Fair game.

[DocBarrister]

Are we really going to allow our little online community to devolve into yet another far-right forum disseminating false and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about George Soros?

DocBarrister

[a fan]

Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential.

Yeah, except that's just dead wrong.

Kristol wasn't even born when this was already our policy, OS. Korean war already happened. Vietnam was well underway before he hit Kindergarten. The US was already propping up leaders all over the world, instead of practicing isolationism as you claim we have done.

Giving it a "cool name" doesn't change the policy, OS. We've been over our skis since WWII ended. Full stop.

And we're still there. Nothing has changed, outside of a lateral step or two the right of left....we're maintaining the same course.

[MDlaxfan76]

Two more Jews for your blood of children drinking dinner parties in the international cabal.

Got it.

Make it 3. Enjoy this from the brightest at the NeoCon dinner party kiddee table. (I'm a big fan of his, btw)

https://www.commentary.org/john-podhore ... rn-crisis/

It's unfortunate that you can't have an honest discussion without playing the race/religion card.
It's a sign of intellectual weakness & a form of bigotry all it's own.
I agreed with the neocons during the Cold War, but they went too far in the aftermath.

Sorry, you don't get to skate by simply naming one more Jew and claiming "race/religion card" by someone.
These were the folks you put at the "dinner parties where they control the course of history".
Surely there are some non-Jews in your international cabal?

This exchange began with you making an argument in favor of a white Christian nationalist imperialist war criminal and his kleptocracy being rewarded for their aggression against a neighbor trying to move toward western values and democracy and defending their land and their people from atrocities.

With a claim that Ukraine should have taken the path of Belarus, then citing 3 people (just coincidentally) of Jewish Eastern European background as somehow the enemy of what, peace and prosperity, for Christian Eastern Europeans?

Was this all unconscious?

You're the one who introduced religion. I was not even aware that Nuland & Applebaum are Jewish. I don't check that when evaluating someone's position. I know that Applebaum married a Polish politician. There'd be a greater chance that they're Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.
I only know that Soros is because bigots like you cry anti-semitism whenever he's criticized.
I suppose I could find some gentile NeoCons, ...if I gave a sh!t or it mattered to anyone other than you & your fellow race baiters.

Ok, so it was simply "unconscious" that you just happened to choose 3 people with Eastern European Jewish heritage in your "dinner parties where they control the course of history" in reference to a conspiratorial plan in Belarus...(what, to encourage the overthrow of another white christian nationalist dictator?)

I guessed their likely background simply from the trope you employed...as you've done so many times in the past. Took one minute to confirm.
Nuland's parents were Jewish Ukrainian immigrants, Applebaum's family, Jewish Reformed, is originally from Belarus.

But ok, it's "unconscious"...perhaps you are just repeating what you hear others say, who are utilizing these tropes?

But after these many times that I've pointed out to you the through line of anti-semitism in these tropes and how they've been utilized historically continuing through to today by fascist populists, perhaps you could stir yourself to bother to avoid them?

Or not.

I have a tough time giving you an automatic pass, given that the specific use of Soros as the emblem of this trope (in prior eras it might have been "Rothschild") you admit you know well...so, you chose to employ it again, invoking this gruesome bigotry.

Here's the thing, if you really didn't intend this offensive, bigoted meaning.
I dunno how many of our fellow readers on here are Jewish, but I have to assume some are, and many others object as well...a simple apology would be a start and a promise to do one's best to avoid such mistakes going forward.

Or you can choose not to do so.

I chose Soros, Nuland & Applebaum because of their public record. Their actions, writings & statements.
Their heritage or religion is of no concern to me unless they make it a part of their position. It is irrelevant.
I was unaware of their religion or if they are observant. I've made no reference or implication to their religion or heritage.
I offer no one an apology. To do so would be patronizing. I'm not going to self-censor based on religion when it is irrelevant.
Your hypersensitivity by proxy is laughable. Tragic history of previous generations does not exempt anyone from critque.
I doubt that neocons represent the majority opinion of Jewish Americans, but that, too, is irrelevant.

Yes, the latter at the end would indeed be irrelevant.

But when you refer to conspiracies and "dinner parties where they control the course of history" and then, just coincidentally, name 3 people, including one you know is frequently claimed by white nationalists as the center of such global Jewish led conspiracies, well, you just have to know better...

And I think you do know. You're neither stupid nor ignorant.

Did you not know the heritage of the other two and this was just a mistake? I'd be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, though it's lazy not to have understood the implications given the reference made and the context.

But we all get intellectually lazy at times, we all make mistakes.

Unfortunately, it's not surprising that you wouldn't apologize for this mistake.

It's an interesting thing learned in kindergarten, apologizing for a mistake, an offense given, but one you seem to not have learned or have un-learned since.

Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential. I don't question their good intentions. I agree with much of what they espouse. Their intentions are noble. Even when I disagree, I admire their eloquence & humor. I part with them when (imho) they overreach & bring us negative unintended consequences.
You should lose your kindergarten sensitivity. We're all adults here.

The influence wielded by George Soros is not a conspiracy or trope. His record of results demonstrates his relevancy.
His religion does not exempt him from critique.

Applebaum used her dinner party as a literary device. She IS extremely influential. Fair game.

Kindergarten manners, Salty, not sensitivity.
One of the important things we learned, or should have learned, is that when we make a mistake, whether of omission or commission, and know that it offended or hurt another, we apologize...failure to do so makes us 'children' who need to repeat kindergarten.

Again, if you truly in your heart of hearts never meant to invoke this insidious trope, it should be very easy to say you are sorry for any offense given and you'll try to be more aware and thoughtful going forward.

Otherwise it's like repeating a slur word repeatedly, despite having it pointed out that it's offensive.

You suggested a conspiracy between these three with a "plan" for Belarus, arranged at "dinner parties where they control the course of history"...it's a slur with a dreadful history that has reemerged rather incredibly loudly through QAnon usage and it's becoming mainstreamed on the right along with "replacement theory".

You know this. You're not oblivious.

Yes, each of these three (and the 3 other Jewish people you cited) has been influential in shaping American policy toward Eastern Europe. Most or all of them have families members killed or lost in pogroms, holocaust, etc, so they may well be personally shaped by those experiences in their advocacy for freedom and democracy in those countries, and away from various forms of authoritarianism that have been so incredibly devastating.

But that doesn't make them part of some international cabal controlling the world.

Yet, that accusation has been charged about Jews of influence in finance, world affairs, etc for many generations.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... rs-of-zion

[old salt]

Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential.

Yeah, except that's just dead wrong.

Kristol wasn't even born when this was already our policy, OS. Korean war already happened. Vietnam was well underway before he hit Kindergarten. The US was already propping up leaders all over the world, instead of practicing isolationism as you claim we have done.

Giving it a "cool name" doesn't change the policy, OS. We've been over our skis since WWII ended. Full stop.

And we're still there. Nothing has changed, outside of a lateral step or two the right of left....we're maintaining the same course.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Kristol

[old salt]

Two more Jews for your blood of children drinking dinner parties in the international cabal.

Got it.

Make it 3. Enjoy this from the brightest at the NeoCon dinner party kiddee table. (I'm a big fan of his, btw)

https://www.commentary.org/john-podhore ... rn-crisis/

It's unfortunate that you can't have an honest discussion without playing the race/religion card.
It's a sign of intellectual weakness & a form of bigotry all it's own.
I agreed with the neocons during the Cold War, but they went too far in the aftermath.

Sorry, you don't get to skate by simply naming one more Jew and claiming "race/religion card" by someone.
These were the folks you put at the "dinner parties where they control the course of history".
Surely there are some non-Jews in your international cabal?

This exchange began with you making an argument in favor of a white Christian nationalist imperialist war criminal and his kleptocracy being rewarded for their aggression against a neighbor trying to move toward western values and democracy and defending their land and their people from atrocities.

With a claim that Ukraine should have taken the path of Belarus, then citing 3 people (just coincidentally) of Jewish Eastern European background as somehow the enemy of what, peace and prosperity, for Christian Eastern Europeans?

Was this all unconscious?

You're the one who introduced religion. I was not even aware that Nuland & Applebaum are Jewish. I don't check that when evaluating someone's position. I know that Applebaum married a Polish politician. There'd be a greater chance that they're Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.
I only know that Soros is because bigots like you cry anti-semitism whenever he's criticized.
I suppose I could find some gentile NeoCons, ...if I gave a sh!t or it mattered to anyone other than you & your fellow race baiters.

Ok, so it was simply "unconscious" that you just happened to choose 3 people with Eastern European Jewish heritage in your "dinner parties where they control the course of history" in reference to a conspiratorial plan in Belarus...(what, to encourage the overthrow of another white christian nationalist dictator?)

I guessed their likely background simply from the trope you employed...as you've done so many times in the past. Took one minute to confirm.
Nuland's parents were Jewish Ukrainian immigrants, Applebaum's family, Jewish Reformed, is originally from Belarus.

But ok, it's "unconscious"...perhaps you are just repeating what you hear others say, who are utilizing these tropes?

But after these many times that I've pointed out to you the through line of anti-semitism in these tropes and how they've been utilized historically continuing through to today by fascist populists, perhaps you could stir yourself to bother to avoid them?

Or not.

I have a tough time giving you an automatic pass, given that the specific use of Soros as the emblem of this trope (in prior eras it might have been "Rothschild") you admit you know well...so, you chose to employ it again, invoking this gruesome bigotry.

Here's the thing, if you really didn't intend this offensive, bigoted meaning.
I dunno how many of our fellow readers on here are Jewish, but I have to assume some are, and many others object as well...a simple apology would be a start and a promise to do one's best to avoid such mistakes going forward.

Or you can choose not to do so.

I chose Soros, Nuland & Applebaum because of their public record. Their actions, writings & statements.
Their heritage or religion is of no concern to me unless they make it a part of their position. It is irrelevant.
I was unaware of their religion or if they are observant. I've made no reference or implication to their religion or heritage.
I offer no one an apology. To do so would be patronizing. I'm not going to self-censor based on religion when it is irrelevant.
Your hypersensitivity by proxy is laughable. Tragic history of previous generations does not exempt anyone from critque.
I doubt that neocons represent the majority opinion of Jewish Americans, but that, too, is irrelevant.

Yes, the latter at the end would indeed be irrelevant.

But when you refer to conspiracies and "dinner parties where they control the course of history" and then, just coincidentally, name 3 people, including one you know is frequently claimed by white nationalists as the center of such global Jewish led conspiracies, well, you just have to know better...

And I think you do know. You're neither stupid nor ignorant.

Did you not know the heritage of the other two and this was just a mistake? I'd be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, though it's lazy not to have understood the implications given the reference made and the context.

But we all get intellectually lazy at times, we all make mistakes.

Unfortunately, it's not surprising that you wouldn't apologize for this mistake.

It's an interesting thing learned in kindergarten, apologizing for a mistake, an offense given, but one you seem to not have learned or have un-learned since.

Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential. I don't question their good intentions. I agree with much of what they espouse. Their intentions are noble. Even when I disagree, I admire their eloquence & humor. I part with them when (imho) they overreach & bring us negative unintended consequences.
You should lose your kindergarten sensitivity. We're all adults here.

The influence wielded by George Soros is not a conspiracy or trope. His record of results demonstrates his relevancy.
His religion does not exempt him from critique.

Applebaum used her dinner party as a literary device. She IS extremely influential. Fair game.

Kindergarten manners, Salty, not sensitivity.
One of the important things we learned, or should have learned, is that when we make a mistake, whether of omission or commission, and know that it offended or hurt another, we apologize...failure to do so makes us 'children' who need to repeat kindergarten.

Again, if you truly in your heart of hearts never meant to invoke this insidious trope, it should be very easy to say you are sorry for any offense given and you'll try to be more aware and thoughtful going forward.

Otherwise it's like repeating a slur word repeatedly, despite having it pointed out that it's offensive.

You suggested a conspiracy between these three with a "plan" for Belarus, arranged at "dinner parties where they control the course of history"...it's a slur with a dreadful history that has reemerged rather incredibly loudly through QAnon usage and it's becoming mainstreamed on the right along with "replacement theory".

You know this. You're not oblivious.

Yes, each of these three (and the 3 other Jewish people you cited) has been influential in shaping American policy toward Eastern Europe. Most or all of them have families members killed or lost in pogroms, holocaust, etc, so they may well be personally shaped by those experiences in their advocacy for freedom and democracy in those countries, and away from various forms of authoritarianism that have been so incredibly devastating.

But that doesn't make them part of some international cabal controlling the world.

Yet, that accusation has been charged about Jews of influence in finance, world affairs, etc for many generations.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... rs-of-zion

...nor does it exempt them from criticism or questioning of what they currently espouse.

I'm not as well versed as you apparently are about the dreadful history you hear about from QAnon.
I'm going by what I hear & read from these prominent individuals who are also influential American citizens.

My Belarus conspiracy theory is my own fear of how I see this going. Give credit where credit is due.
I'm not aware of it being propagated elsewhere. All you have to do is watch was has been happening,
...& read Anne Applebaum.

[a fan]

Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential.

Yeah, except that's just dead wrong.

Kristol wasn't even born when this was already our policy, OS. Korean war already happened. Vietnam was well underway before he hit Kindergarten. The US was already propping up leaders all over the world, instead of practicing isolationism as you claim we have done.

Giving it a "cool name" doesn't change the policy, OS. We've been over our skis since WWII ended. Full stop.

And we're still there. Nothing has changed, outside of a lateral step or two the right of left....we're maintaining the same course.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Kristol

Oh THAT Kristol....mea culpa for getting the wrong Kristol...Bill. Ignore the second paragraph.

As for the rest.....

[old salt]

Are we really going to allow our little online community to devolve into yet another far-right forum disseminating false and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about George Soros?

DocBarrister

https://www.wsj.com/articles/dueling-ap ... 1653509537

Kissinger vs. Soros on Russia and Ukraine
The notable nonagenerians offer dueling visions of world order at the World Economic Forum.

By Walter Russell Mead, May 25, 2022
Davos, Switzerland

Two American immigrants, both survivors of life under Nazi rule still making waves in their nineties, set the terms of debate at the World Economic Forum. Henry Kissinger, who celebrates his 99th birthday this week, made a virtual appearance to urge against attempts to defeat or marginalize Russia, calling on Ukraine to accept the territorial losses of 2014 to end the war. A few hours later, George Soros, in person at the forum at age 91, warned that victory in the war against Vladimir Putin’s Russia was necessary to “save civilization” and urged the West to provide Ukraine with everything it needs to prevail.

Their prescriptions are radically different, but their perceptions have much in common. Both men believe that American values and interests make the defense of peace in Europe a primary goal of American foreign policy. Both see themselves as defenders of what is best in Western civilization. Both see the war as a major shock to the world system and fear the consequences of a long military struggle. Messrs. Kissinger and Soros both believe that Russia is ultimately a secondary problem for American policy, and that the future of U.S.-China relations is of much greater significance in the long run.

Where they disagree is on the nature of the order and civilization they seek to conserve. Mr. Soros, much like the Biden administration, sees the dominant issue in world politics as a struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. Democracies are obliged by law to respect the rights of their citizens at home, and must conduct themselves under the restraints of international law abroad.

Totalitarian rulers reject such limits at home and abroad, and Mr. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is as lawless as his treatment of dissidents at home. His attack on Ukraine is an attack on the fundamental principles of international order, and if that attack succeeds, international politics will return to the law of the jungle by which, as the Athenians once told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

The Kissinger position is less ideological. There always has been and always will be many types of government in the world. America’s job is to create and defend a balance of power that protects our freedom and that of our allies at the least possible risk and cost. We do not have a mission to convert the Russians and Chinese to the gospel of democracy and we must recognize that rival great powers have rights and interests that must be respected. Russia, as Mr. Kissinger told the Davos audience, is and will remain an important element in the European state system, and an enduring peace must recognize that unavoidable fact.

Looking at history, the one thing that seems clear is that neither approach yields an infallible guide to success. The French and British leaders who tried to appease Hitler in the 1930s made very Kissingerian arguments about the need to respect German national interests. The neoconservatives pushing George W. Bush to invade Iraq made Sorosian arguments about the totalitarian nature of Saddam Hussein’s regime. As Messrs. Kissinger and Soros would both agree, mechanistically applying any theory of history to the messy realities of international life is a good way to get into trouble.

...does anyone know Kissinger's heritage or religion ?

[DocBarrister]

Are we really going to allow our little online community to devolve into yet another far-right forum disseminating false and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about George Soros?

DocBarrister

https://www.wsj.com/articles/dueling-ap ... 1653509537

Kissinger vs. Soros on Russia and Ukraine
The notable nonagenerians offer dueling visions of world order at the World Economic Forum.

By Walter Russell Mead, May 25, 2022
Davos, Switzerland

Two American immigrants, both survivors of life under Nazi rule still making waves in their nineties, set the terms of debate at the World Economic Forum. Henry Kissinger, who celebrates his 99th birthday this week, made a virtual appearance to urge against attempts to defeat or marginalize Russia, calling on Ukraine to accept the territorial losses of 2014 to end the war. A few hours later, George Soros, in person at the forum at age 91, warned that victory in the war against Vladimir Putin’s Russia was necessary to “save civilization” and urged the West to provide Ukraine with everything it needs to prevail.

Their prescriptions are radically different, but their perceptions have much in common. Both men believe that American values and interests make the defense of peace in Europe a primary goal of American foreign policy. Both see themselves as defenders of what is best in Western civilization. Both see the war as a major shock to the world system and fear the consequences of a long military struggle. Messrs. Kissinger and Soros both believe that Russia is ultimately a secondary problem for American policy, and that the future of U.S.-China relations is of much greater significance in the long run.

Where they disagree is on the nature of the order and civilization they seek to conserve. Mr. Soros, much like the Biden administration, sees the dominant issue in world politics as a struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. Democracies are obliged by law to respect the rights of their citizens at home, and must conduct themselves under the restraints of international law abroad.

Totalitarian rulers reject such limits at home and abroad, and Mr. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is as lawless as his treatment of dissidents at home. His attack on Ukraine is an attack on the fundamental principles of international order, and if that attack succeeds, international politics will return to the law of the jungle by which, as the Athenians once told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

The Kissinger position is less ideological. There always has been and always will be many types of government in the world. America’s job is to create and defend a balance of power that protects our freedom and that of our allies at the least possible risk and cost. We do not have a mission to convert the Russians and Chinese to the gospel of democracy and we must recognize that rival great powers have rights and interests that must be respected. Russia, as Mr. Kissinger told the Davos audience, is and will remain an important element in the European state system, and an enduring peace must recognize that unavoidable fact.

Looking at history, the one thing that seems clear is that neither approach yields an infallible guide to success. The French and British leaders who tried to appease Hitler in the 1930s made very Kissingerian arguments about the need to respect German national interests. The neoconservatives pushing George W. Bush to invade Iraq made Sorosian arguments about the totalitarian nature of Saddam Hussein’s regime. As Messrs. Kissinger and Soros would both agree, mechanistically applying any theory of history to the messy realities of international life is a good way to get into trouble.

...does anyone know Kissinger's heritage or religion ?

You really don’t understand how offensive and bigoted your posts have been, do you?

I think you have been perusing too many far-right websites.

I think you should take a break and consider again why your posts were anti-Semitic and bigoted.

DocBarrister

[a fan]

Where they disagree is on the nature of the order and civilization they seek to conserve. Mr. Soros, much like the Biden administration, sees the dominant issue in world politics as a struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. Democracies are obliged by law to respect the rights of their citizens at home, and must conduct themselves under the restraints of international law abroad.

Totalitarian rulers reject such limits at home and abroad, and Mr. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is as lawless as his treatment of dissidents at home. His attack on Ukraine is an attack on the fundamental principles of international order, and if that attack succeeds, international politics will return to the law of the jungle by which, as the Athenians once told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Metaphor falls apart in that Ukraine isn't a democracy. We're defending one kleptocracy from another.

It also falls apart because the West and NATO are trading with Putin. So there goes the "fundamental principles of international order"...right out the door. Don't get essential goods from your enemy. Pretty simple stuff.

If any principle applies, it's the Pottery Barn rule.....the US and the UK convinced Ukraine to give up their nukes, guaranteeing no invasion from Russia. Bad mistake.

[DocBarrister]

Ukraine appears poised to deliver another crucial blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war effort with a counteroffensive to take back Kherson, which was the first major Ukrainian city seized by Russia after its invasion in February.

Ukraine has blacked out all media on its operations around the southern city this week, as it did ahead of a successful counteroffensive in the northeast last month. Experts studying the war said all signs point to a major offensive in the coming days, with Russia already signaling its potential retreat.

Ukrainian victory in Kherson, which is the only regional capital that has been captured by Russian forces, could set the direction of the rest of the war, said John Spencer, chairman of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point.

“Strategically, operationally and tactically, it’ll send a signal that Russia can’t hold ground in Ukraine, and the path to victory for Ukraine is pretty much assured. The timeline’s still in question, but the path to victory is pretty assured,” he said.

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3697 ... erson/amp/

DocBarrister

[old salt]

You really don’t understand how offensive and bigoted your posts have been, do you?

I think you have been perusing too many far-right websites.

I think you should take a break and consider again why your posts were anti-Semitic and bigoted.

DocBarrister

Do you consider National Review , WSJ, The Washington Post & Defense One to be far right wing ?
Those are the websites I "peruse" routinely.

Of the sites I've referenced in this discussion :
Salon is hardly right wing. This war was fortold there.
I just stumbled upon Truthout when researching Nuland on Ukraine.
They seem more left wing. They have an impressive body of work on Ukraine dating back to 2014.
The American Conservative was founded by Pat Buchanan in 2002. It is to PaleoConservatism what The Weekly Standard was to NeoConservatism, albeit on a much more modest scale.

Stop trying to suppress opinions that you disagree with.
It's a cheap trick. Contrived & slimy.

[Seacoaster(1)]

The little problem of war crimes:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/22/worl ... tions.html

“As Russian forces laid siege to the Ukrainian city of Mariupol this spring, children fled bombed-out group homes and boarding schools. Separated from their families, they followed neighbors or strangers heading west, seeking the relative safety of central Ukraine.

Instead, at checkpoints around the city, pro-Russia forces intercepted them, according to interviews with the children, witnesses and family members. The authorities put them on buses headed deeper into Russian-held territory.

“I didn’t want to go,” said Anya, 14, who escaped a home for tuberculosis patients in Mariupol and is now with a foster family near Moscow. “But nobody asked me.”

In the rush to flee, she said, she left behind a sketchbook containing her mother’s phone number. All she could remember were the first three digits.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began in February, Russian authorities have announced with patriotic fanfare the transfer of thousands of Ukrainian children to Russia to be adopted and become citizens. On state-run television, officials offer teddy bears to new arrivals, who are portrayed as abandoned children being rescued from war.

In fact, this mass transfer of children is a potential war crime, regardless of whether they were orphans. And while many of the children did come from orphanages and group homes, the authorities also took children whose relatives or guardians want them back, according to interviews with children and families on both sides of the border.

As Russian troops pushed into Ukraine, children like Anya who were fleeing newly occupied territories were swept up. Some were taken after their parents had been killed or imprisoned by Russian troops, according to local Ukrainian officials.

This systematic resettlement is part of a broader strategy by the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, to treat Ukraine as a part of Russia and cast his illegal invasion as a noble cause. His government has used children — including the sick, poor and orphaned — as part of a propaganda campaign presenting Russia as a charitable savior.

Through interviews with parents, officials, doctors and children in Ukraine and Russia, The New York Times identified several children who had been taken away. Some returned home. Others, like Anya, remain in Russia.

….

Anya and others described a wrenching process of coercion, deception and force as children were shipped to Russia from Ukraine. Together, their accounts add to a growing body of evidence from governments and news reports about a removal-and-adoption policy that targets the most vulnerable children in the most dangerous situations.

Transferring people out of an occupied territory can be a war crime, and experts say the practice is especially thorny when it involves children, who may not be able to consent. Ukrainian officials accuse Russia of perpetrating a genocide. The forced transfer of children, when intended to destroy a national group, is an act of genocide under international law.

Russian officials have made clear that their goal is to replace any childhood attachment to home with a love for Russia.“

[Farfromgeneva]

Are we really going to allow our little online community to devolve into yet another far-right forum disseminating false and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about George Soros?

DocBarrister

https://www.wsj.com/articles/dueling-ap ... 1653509537

Kissinger vs. Soros on Russia and Ukraine
The notable nonagenerians offer dueling visions of world order at the World Economic Forum.

By Walter Russell Mead, May 25, 2022
Davos, Switzerland

Two American immigrants, both survivors of life under Nazi rule still making waves in their nineties, set the terms of debate at the World Economic Forum. Henry Kissinger, who celebrates his 99th birthday this week, made a virtual appearance to urge against attempts to defeat or marginalize Russia, calling on Ukraine to accept the territorial losses of 2014 to end the war. A few hours later, George Soros, in person at the forum at age 91, warned that victory in the war against Vladimir Putin’s Russia was necessary to “save civilization” and urged the West to provide Ukraine with everything it needs to prevail.

Their prescriptions are radically different, but their perceptions have much in common. Both men believe that American values and interests make the defense of peace in Europe a primary goal of American foreign policy. Both see themselves as defenders of what is best in Western civilization. Both see the war as a major shock to the world system and fear the consequences of a long military struggle. Messrs. Kissinger and Soros both believe that Russia is ultimately a secondary problem for American policy, and that the future of U.S.-China relations is of much greater significance in the long run.

Where they disagree is on the nature of the order and civilization they seek to conserve. Mr. Soros, much like the Biden administration, sees the dominant issue in world politics as a struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. Democracies are obliged by law to respect the rights of their citizens at home, and must conduct themselves under the restraints of international law abroad.

Totalitarian rulers reject such limits at home and abroad, and Mr. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is as lawless as his treatment of dissidents at home. His attack on Ukraine is an attack on the fundamental principles of international order, and if that attack succeeds, international politics will return to the law of the jungle by which, as the Athenians once told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

The Kissinger position is less ideological. There always has been and always will be many types of government in the world. America’s job is to create and defend a balance of power that protects our freedom and that of our allies at the least possible risk and cost. We do not have a mission to convert the Russians and Chinese to the gospel of democracy and we must recognize that rival great powers have rights and interests that must be respected. Russia, as Mr. Kissinger told the Davos audience, is and will remain an important element in the European state system, and an enduring peace must recognize that unavoidable fact.

Looking at history, the one thing that seems clear is that neither approach yields an infallible guide to success. The French and British leaders who tried to appease Hitler in the 1930s made very Kissingerian arguments about the need to respect German national interests. The neoconservatives pushing George W. Bush to invade Iraq made Sorosian arguments about the totalitarian nature of Saddam Hussein’s regime. As Messrs. Kissinger and Soros would both agree, mechanistically applying any theory of history to the messy realities of international life is a good way to get into trouble.

...does anyone know Kissinger's heritage or religion ?

When adults leave the room

[Farfromgeneva]

Where they disagree is on the nature of the order and civilization they seek to conserve. Mr. Soros, much like the Biden administration, sees the dominant issue in world politics as a struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. Democracies are obliged by law to respect the rights of their citizens at home, and must conduct themselves under the restraints of international law abroad.

Totalitarian rulers reject such limits at home and abroad, and Mr. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is as lawless as his treatment of dissidents at home. His attack on Ukraine is an attack on the fundamental principles of international order, and if that attack succeeds, international politics will return to the law of the jungle by which, as the Athenians once told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Metaphor falls apart in that Ukraine isn't a democracy. We're defending one kleptocracy from another.

It also falls apart because the West and NATO are trading with Putin. So there goes the "fundamental principles of international order"...right out the door. Don't get essential goods from your enemy. Pretty simple stuff.

If any principle applies, it's the Pottery Barn rule.....the US and the UK convinced Ukraine to give up their nukes, guaranteeing no invasion from Russia. Bad mistake.

Domain knowledge doesn’t equal intellect. I can keep saying this and folks can keep responding to someone pretending they have intellectual credibility vs simply anachronistic, temporal, domain knowledge.

[MDlaxfan76]

You really don’t understand how offensive and bigoted your posts have been, do you?

I think you have been perusing too many far-right websites.

I think you should take a break and consider again why your posts were anti-Semitic and bigoted.

DocBarrister

Do you consider National Review , WSJ, The Washington Post & Defense One to be far right wing ?
Those are the websites I "peruse" routinely.

Of the sites I've referenced in this discussion :
Salon is hardly right wing. This war was fortold there.
I just stumbled upon Truthout when researching Nuland on Ukraine.
They seem more left wing. They have an impressive body of work on Ukraine dating back to 2014.
The American Conservative was founded by Pat Buchanan in 2002. It is to PaleoConservatism what The Weekly Standard was to NeoConservatism, albeit on a much more modest scale.

Stop trying to suppress opinions that you disagree with.
It's a cheap trick. Contrived & slimy.

Salty, we can and do discuss contrary opinions, indeed with some vigor and relish.

But the use of anti-semitic tropes is not ok. Period.

[MDlaxfan76]

Where they disagree is on the nature of the order and civilization they seek to conserve. Mr. Soros, much like the Biden administration, sees the dominant issue in world politics as a struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. Democracies are obliged by law to respect the rights of their citizens at home, and must conduct themselves under the restraints of international law abroad.

Totalitarian rulers reject such limits at home and abroad, and Mr. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is as lawless as his treatment of dissidents at home. His attack on Ukraine is an attack on the fundamental principles of international order, and if that attack succeeds, international politics will return to the law of the jungle by which, as the Athenians once told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Metaphor falls apart in that Ukraine isn't a democracy. We're defending one kleptocracy from another.

It also falls apart because the West and NATO are trading with Putin. So there goes the "fundamental principles of international order"...right out the door. Don't get essential goods from your enemy. Pretty simple stuff.

If any principle applies, it's the Pottery Barn rule.....the US and the UK convinced Ukraine to give up their nukes, guaranteeing no invasion from Russia. Bad mistake.

I think you're applying a notion of perfection that even the USA does not meet when describing Ukraine as "not a democracy" but rather a "kleptocracy".

There's no question that Ukraine has evolved to open elections without heavy voter intimidation or suppression and is open to the foreign press. They are clearly trying to improve their democratic processes and institutions and have been reaching out toward the West, expressing affinity with western liberal values over authoritarian rule.

Yes, they've been plagued with corruption and countervailing forces against this move westward, but they've moved quite significantly over the past decade...plenty far to go, but the movement is significant.

I'm not sure what your point is about trade...are you saying that the strategy of trade as a means of opening the world to the opportunities of interdependence is a fundamentally wrong strategy in the pursuit of peace and prosperity?

[old salt]

You really don’t understand how offensive and bigoted your posts have been, do you?

I think you have been perusing too many far-right websites.

I think you should take a break and consider again why your posts were anti-Semitic and bigoted.

DocBarrister

Do you consider National Review , WSJ, The Washington Post & Defense One to be far right wing ?
Those are the websites I "peruse" routinely.

Of the sites I've referenced in this discussion :
Salon is hardly right wing. This war was fortold there.
I just stumbled upon Truthout when researching Nuland on Ukraine.
They seem more left wing. They have an impressive body of work on Ukraine dating back to 2014.
The American Conservative was founded by Pat Buchanan in 2002. It is to PaleoConservatism what The Weekly Standard was to NeoConservatism, albeit on a much more modest scale.

Stop trying to suppress opinions that you disagree with.
It's a cheap trick. Contrived & slimy.

Salty, we can and do discuss contrary opinions, indeed with some vigor and relish.

But the use of anti-semitic tropes is not ok. Period.

...then stop fabricating them where they do not exist.

[MDlaxfan76]

You really don’t understand how offensive and bigoted your posts have been, do you?

I think you have been perusing too many far-right websites.

I think you should take a break and consider again why your posts were anti-Semitic and bigoted.

DocBarrister

Do you consider National Review , WSJ, The Washington Post & Defense One to be far right wing ?
Those are the websites I "peruse" routinely.

Of the sites I've referenced in this discussion :
Salon is hardly right wing. This war was fortold there.
I just stumbled upon Truthout when researching Nuland on Ukraine.
They seem more left wing. They have an impressive body of work on Ukraine dating back to 2014.
The American Conservative was founded by Pat Buchanan in 2002. It is to PaleoConservatism what The Weekly Standard was to NeoConservatism, albeit on a much more modest scale.

Stop trying to suppress opinions that you disagree with.
It's a cheap trick. Contrived & slimy.

Salty, we can and do discuss contrary opinions, indeed with some vigor and relish.

But the use of anti-semitic tropes is not ok. Period.

...then stop fabricating them where they do not exist.

Nope, you wrote what you wrote, very clearly utilizing those tropes.
You know better; it's been pointed out to you multiple times previously.
Pretending that you have no understanding of these tropes exposes this even further.
Pretending you don't know what Qanon is spreading is not persuasive.
Pretending you don't know the history of these tropes is just not believable.

And you refuse to apologize for the offense.
Assuming it was a mistake, whether conscious or unconscious, it's easy to recognize the error and to commit to trying harder to avoid that mistake going forward.

Or not. You choose not.

[PizzaSnake]

You really don’t understand how offensive and bigoted your posts have been, do you?

I think you have been perusing too many far-right websites.

I think you should take a break and consider again why your posts were anti-Semitic and bigoted.

DocBarrister

Do you consider National Review , WSJ, The Washington Post & Defense One to be far right wing ?
Those are the websites I "peruse" routinely.

Of the sites I've referenced in this discussion :
Salon is hardly right wing. This war was fortold there.
I just stumbled upon Truthout when researching Nuland on Ukraine.
They seem more left wing. They have an impressive body of work on Ukraine dating back to 2014.
The American Conservative was founded by Pat Buchanan in 2002. It is to PaleoConservatism what The Weekly Standard was to NeoConservatism, albeit on a much more modest scale.

Stop trying to suppress opinions that you disagree with.
It's a cheap trick. Contrived & slimy.

Salty, we can and do discuss contrary opinions, indeed with some vigor and relish.

But the use of anti-semitic tropes is not ok. Period.

...then stop fabricating them where they do not exist.

Nope, you wrote what you wrote, very clearly utilizing those tropes.
You know better; it's been pointed out to you multiple times previously.
Pretending that you have no understanding of these tropes exposes this even further.
Pretending you don't know what Qanon is spreading is not persuasive.
Pretending you don't know the history of these tropes is just not believable.

And you refuse to apologize for the offense.
Assuming it was a mistake, whether conscious or unconscious, it's easy to recognize the error and to commit to trying harder to avoid that mistake going forward.

Or not. You choose not.

OS clearly is not a student of literature. It matters not what his intent was, which may or may not ever be known (including to himself), rather how those words are perceived. This feeble attempt to control other’s perception is representative of a great deal of the public discourse these days.