You know, for all russia hyped this speech, I was expecting something more substantial than a childish temper tantrum.
You know, for all russia hyped this speech, I was expecting something more substantial than a childish temper tantrum.
Why? A childish temper tantrum is very typical of autocrats.
What I find odd is that ANYONE would find it impressive. It's just a loony ranting and raving on stage. It's comical, not charismatic.
Like people say of Hitler: "well atleast he was charismatic". No he wasn't, unless you have a single digit IQ.
English translator seemingly got Skype dc'd
- - - Updated - - -
BBC decided to cut off from the speech at roughly 10:40 uk time just as he mentioned NATO over something.
Finished up by saying they were suspending participation in the START treaty. You know, the one they have been ignoring for a long time anyway.
He just had to get his nuclear weenie out at least once.
So to sum up, no declaration of war, no mobilization, loads of impotent rage and crying about his nuclear security blankey?
Also: can we get to the part where they start shooting eachother?
Last edited by Iphie; 2023-02-21 at 11:05 AM.
Its just theatrics for the peanut gallery making a big deal out of formally declaring things that everyone knows they’ve already been doing for years now.
Bet it excites Yuppie real good, though.
That was never his real aim. The whole trump stick was that he wanted to lessen the military expenditure of the us.
As the us historically and in the present always has taken the vast burden of maintaining the power of nato.
The 2% expenditure of gdp was agreed upon commonly back in 2006 but was never really followed through on by member states.
Trump wanted to make that mandatory (not just him tbh many of the less dovish nato members wanted to make that mandatory).
Like a pay your bills or else we let the wolves eat you.
It worked somewhat but not very well sadly. As no major threat presented itself clearly, it was hard for governments to defend the extra expenditure.
And worse yet it was a very lose threat, the option never presented itself as something realistic. (Strategically the loss of such vast/ important territories would always mean it was never going to be a genuine option).
Now the climate is somewhat different you could say lol, and we can thank Putin for that.
Shame that we needed something like this to wake up.
But understandable at the same time, we in europe have enjoyed the american peace for so long that people have come to believe it is something natural.
Hindsight is 20/20. If this document sets out the first phase to be finished in 2022, then it was authored before the invasion and probably years earlier. They expected Ukraine to roll over. We know it did not happen but it was not altogether unrealistic - if they had succeeded in taking Kyiv in a coup de main, the decapitated country may have become paralysed long enough for their purposes. That in turn would have created a different picture for NATO. Especially if they counted on Trump holding the US back from intervening.
- - - Updated - - -
There was certainly a lot of salt. Such a lot as you would need if, say, someone was to warp in a few spaceships full of popcorn.
SALT as "Strategic Arms Limitation Talks?" Which in turn led to START; Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties, which proposed limits on multiple-warhead capacities and other restrictions...
Sometimes, the light of the moon is a key to other spaces. I've found a place where, for a night or two, the streets curve in unfamiliar ways. If I walk here, I might find insight, or I might be touched by madness.
Last edited by Makabreska; 2023-02-21 at 04:24 PM.
Sometimes, the light of the moon is a key to other spaces. I've found a place where, for a night or two, the streets curve in unfamiliar ways. If I walk here, I might find insight, or I might be touched by madness.