LaxPower Back-Up Stick

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:08 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:33 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:25 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:15 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:11 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 1:58 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 1:31 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:24 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:37 am

DMac wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:16 pm Must say, I'm a little blown away by your question, MDlax.

An "old salt" is an old sailor who is often a raconteur, or teller of sea stories. Much of the history and traditions of mariners are passed from generation to generation by these sea stories as told and retold by old salts. Sea stories may be truthful, half-truths, or falsehoods. However, they always enhance the reputations of sailors.

I was in the cold war too, chased submarines around in the Mediterraian and North Atlantic, chased 'em up past the Arctic Circle and into the Baltic Sea too. Stopped in a lot of nice places along the way too. Nary a one didn't have a bar.

Interesting point about 'old salt', truths, half-truths, etc.

My question was intended seriously, as salty has often referred to his experience in the Cold War informing his perspective about wanting to avoid another Cold War with Putin's Russia. That's an interesting position and I'm indeed interested in what about his experiences causes him to applaud isolationist moves by the US, withdrawal and/or disengagement around the world.

He's a consistent, passionate advocate for moves and policies that would be applauded in Moscow, given Putin's expansionist ambitions. He's highly dismissive of the threat Russia poses in its cyber campaigns to undermine western democracy and trust in the institutions that bolster that democracy and rule of law.

This seems like a strange place to arrive, given the background to which he often alludes.

Most folks who I know who were involved in the Cold War with Russia see a strong echo in Putin and see the criticality of consistency in confronting those expansionist ambitions and interference, not reverting to isolationism and appeasement.

So, my question is what about that former experience actually brought him to that position?

Interesting movie on Netflix now: The Command...

It's a complex. Something akin to Stockholm Syndrome.

Perhaps because I'm acutely aware of the potential consequences (at a granular level) of the application of military force, specifically against a Soviet or Russian enemy. I spent years preparing for & pondering that eventuality & helping to develop tactics & weapons systems that we would employ. I had the opportunity to study, experience, closely observe, confront & counter (at the operational level) our Soviet (& proxy) adversaries. The stakes were high, the tensions were often high, the potential consequences devastating. We are fortunate to have survived the Cold War without a major conflict with the USSR.

Russia today is a much weaker economic power than was the USSR, but they remain our most formidable military adversary.
I'm concerned that we are moving closer to confrontation (again) with Russia because of partisan political reasons rather than legitimate strategic reasons. In the information age, elevating "election meddling" to an "act of war" is folly, particularly when it's done by people who have no first hand appreciation of what "war" with Russia would entail. I'm not fearful of confronting Russia again, but when we do, I want it to be for good strategic (not political) reasons, from a position of strength, & not out ahead of our NATO allies.

My views are not that far our of the mainstream, particularly when you consider the detente & reset which have occurred since the end of the Cold War. Kissinger & other legit foreign policy scholars have questioned the wisdom of NATO expansion beyond the unification of Germany & advocated for the "Findlandisation" of Ukraine. We are now coping with the consequences of our post Cold War decisions.

I should have said “is possibly Stockholm Syndrome”....Politics weren’t involved when you were serving? My guess is “that was different”...

The Cold War was not this politicized. Countering the global Soviet threat was a bi-partisan objective, shared by our NATO & Pacific allies.

I am not sure what not this politicized means....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z ... revision/8

No politics here.

Vietnam was just one theater & one phase of the Cold War.
The entire nation was much more aware & supportive of the Cold War than they are of our current escalating tensions with Russia.
The dramatic change in (D) support of lethal military aid to Ukraine from the Obama to Trump Admin's illustrates the political opportunism impacting our policy re. Russia.

The Information Age has distorted your perception of the role of politics.

As a serving member of the military at the time, I was acutely aware of the growing anti-Vietnam war movement, but it was focused on the war in Vietnam (in isolation). We sensed no less commitment to the wider Cold War struggle against Communism (Soviet, ChiCom, Cuban & other proxies). There was no pull back in our other global deployments & confrontations. Particularly when Reagan came into office. We were united in our Cold War mission of countering the global threat of Soviet lead Communism. Our current anti-Russian sentiment smacks of political opportunism -- sour grapes over a single election loss.

Kismet wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:19 pm

Our current anti-Russian sentiment smacks of political opportunism -- sour grapes over a single election loss.

If it doesn't look like a duck. quack like a duck or otherwise resemble a duck - it isn't an EFFING DUCK!

Sadly, for you facts don't seem to matter. We are WAY BEYOND sour grapes and an election. You are ignoring evidence of criminal activity in plain sight which is most certainly impeachable.

Removing the stable genius does not undo an election - Mike Pence would be the new CiC upon that action. Everyone who voted for TrumptyDumpty also voted for Pence.

Trinity wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:32 pm Every Republican Senator is currently pushing Kremlin disinformation. They’ve been briefed on Ukraine. They know they are lying for Putin. Horowitz report yet?

njbill wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 6:13 pm Americans should be heartened that the FBI and the DOJ evidently played things down the middle and did not instigate the political hit job they were (it seems) wrongly accused of.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:54 pm For Old Salt's predictions to be accurate, they need indictments. And not just one. A bunch of them.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:02 pm You remembered! Nicely done.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:41 pm Yup. You remember, alright.



And a steak dinner Congress does nothing to fix any systemic problems they find with FISA etc.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:54 pm For Old Salt's predictions to be accurate, they need indictments. And not just one. A bunch of them.

njbill wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:21 pm Well, I guess we will see you soon enough whether the WaPo’s “pre-spin” or yours turns out to be accurate.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:52 pm Free Carter Page

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:51 pm

njbill wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:21 pm Well, I guess we will see you soon enough whether the WaPo’s “pre-spin” or yours turns out to be accurate.

It's probably accurate. That doesn't mean they've seen all the details.