• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Biden expels Russian diplomats and imposes sanctions

Copernicus

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
5,560
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
Vladimir Putin no longer has a friend in the White House. He got away with four years of cyberattacks and meddling in our domestic politics, but now the chickens have come back to roost. There will also be actions taken that are not announced, but the public actions are fairly mild and targeted largely to the organizations and individuals that were most involved in the aggressive acts against the US. The expelled diplomats will be those involved in espionage activities, and the Russian companies will be those that played a role in the Solarwinds hack and election meddling. Russia will try to retaliate, but this is what Putin had to know would happen after his BFF left office. So Biden has left options for strengthening economic sanctions, if the aggressive behavior continues. The question is when and how the downward spiral in relations with Russia will end. Both sides will eventually have to find ways to establish a stable working relationship. Right now, that seems impossible. Biden has proposed a summit meeting to discuss differences, but Putin may not be ready for that.

See: US expels Russian diplomats, imposes sanctions for hacking
 
I like to keep an open mind. Are we absolutely sure it wasn't a 400-pound genius sitting in bed and playing with his computer?

(Actually...substitute turd for genius and that's Trump's confession.)
 
barbos said:
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2...ian-sanctions-are-shortsighted-and-dangerous/
Click to expand...

that article said:
The Biden administration's decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan is a wise and morally courageous one.... Previous U.S. "strategy" in Afghanistan was a kind of zombie policy: in reality dead, but still walking around because nobody in Washington could bring themselves to bury it.

... [But] Biden has stated that the new sanctions against Russia announced today have been imposed for three reasons and all three of them are wrong.

The Solarwinds hack ... was an espionage operation in cyberspace, of a kind that the United States has openly acknowledged carrying out against Russia and other states. All major states conduct this kind of espionage, and it has never previously been made a cause of sanctions. The Biden administration is therefore introducing a new and very dangerous factor into international relations. Moreover, America's ally Israel has just carried out an open act of cyber-sabotage against Iran in a transparent effort to destroy U.S. talks with Iran without a word of Washington condemnation in response. Is this what a "ruled-based international order" looks like?

... [And] the whole allegation [that Russia placed a bounty on U.S. soldiers] seems utterly counterintuitive. Does the Taliban really need Russian encouragement to attack US troops? And why should Russia engage in such a strategically pointless and provocative action?

Most important of all, if their confidence in this accusation is only "low to moderate," why is the Biden administration talking about it at all in connection with sanctions? Are wild and unproven accusations a responsible way to conduct U.S. policy? One area where the United States needs and might even get important Russian help is in trying to maintain an Afghan peace settlement and prevent an outright Taliban victory. This statement is no sort of way to seek such cooperation.

These sanctions will drive Russia still further into the arms of China....

Finally ... If President Zelensky of Ukraine decides that Washington's hostility to Russia is so absolute that he can depend on it for support in a war, then he may make the mistake of President Saakashvili of Georgia in August 2008 and try to resolve the Donbas issue by force.

The United States will then be forced to choose between abandoning Ukraine and going to war with Russia (and we know which of these choices Beijing would like Washington to take). Almost certainly, as in August 2008, the United States will abandon its "ally." And then, if these latest sanctions have helped to convince Moscow that U.S. hostility is so implacable and unchanging that Russia has nothing to lose, the Russian army will have no incentive to stop at the Donbas. The result will be an acute humiliation for Washington, with dangerous wider implications.
Click to expand...
The article has a "ring of truth," but lacking expertise, I like to check on the messenger. Responsiblestatecraft.Org gets financial help BOTH from George Soros and Charles Koch! It's hated by some right-wingers; that's a good sign. The President and Founder  Andrew Bacevich seems to be qualified and very reasonable.
 
barbos said:
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2...ian-sanctions-are-shortsighted-and-dangerous/
Click to expand...

I found the article to contain a number of strawman arguments against Biden's measured response to the Solarwinds attack and election interference, both of which required action on Biden's part. (Yes, it was definitely an "attack", and the author of the article likely knows why it would be considered so.) The idea that sanctions are ineffective is easy to disprove. Getting the sanctions dropped has been one of Putin's primary goals since his intervention in the 2016 election, where the winning candidate had a campaign manager who passed information on the campaign to Russian intelligence operative Konstantin Kilimnik. If the sanctions were ineffective, Putin would never have gone to such lengths to fight them. Moreover, the ban on investment in the Russian debt is far more damaging than the sanctions on individuals. That is where the real bite is in Biden's actions.

It should be noted that the author of this opinion piece, Anatol Lieven, may not be an entirely unbiased source. He is a member of the  Valdai discussion club in Russia, which has close ties to Putin and other Russian government officials. This is not to say that his credentials in the area are weak or that his article shouldn't be considered. He is a respected scholar. Here is what Wikipedia has to say about his club:

The Valdai Discussion Club is a Moscow-based think tank and discussion forum, established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai, which is located close to Veliky Novgorod, where the Club’s first meeting took place. In 2014, the management of the Club was transferred to the Valdai Club Foundation, established in 2011 by the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy, the Russian International Affairs Council, Moscow State Institute of International Relations, and Higher School of Economics.

OVERVIEW

The Valdai conference is closely linked with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has met with the participants of the Valdai Club’s annual meetings every year since its founding. Among many other Russian Government officials attending Valdai meetings are Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister and former President; Sergey Ivanov, former Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office; Sergey Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs; Sergey Shoygu, Minister of Defence; and others.

Daniel W. Drezner, professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, describes Valdai as "a swanky high-level conference put on by the Russian elite." Drezner describes Valdai as "the highest-profile Russian equivalent to Davos" and writes that the chief value to attendees is the ability to determine the official line of the Russian government, although attendance also risks "greater legitimacy on a government that has been accused of some less-than-legitimate activities as of late." Nikolay Petrov of the Carnegie Moscow Center identified Valdai as "a project used as blatant propaganda by the Kremlin" while Russian sociologist Lilia Shevtsova criticized the Valdai conferences in an article entitled "Putin's Useful Idiots." Marcel H. Van Herpen identifies Valdai as a soft power effort by the Kremlin in service of Russian foreign policy goals, with Russian leadership using the conference in a bid to (1) gain goodwill among Western intellectuals, (2) create networking opportunities between Russian and Western elites, and (3) "create a testing ground for the Kremlin's foreign policy initiatives." Angus Roxburgh notes that RIA Novosti was important to the establishment of Valdai during Putin's second term, and that the conference plays a key role in the Russian government's effort to burnish Putin's image and influence outsiders...
Click to expand...
 
Copernicus said:
barbos said:
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2...ian-sanctions-are-shortsighted-and-dangerous/
Click to expand...

I found the article to contain a number of strawman arguments against Biden's measured response to the Solarwinds attack and election interference, both of which required action on Biden's part. (Yes, it was definitely an "attack", and the author of the article likely knows why it would be considered so.) The idea that sanctions are ineffective is easy to disprove. Getting the sanctions dropped has been one of Putin's primary goals since his intervention in the 2016 election, where the winning candidate had a campaign manager who passed information on the campaign to Russian intelligence operative Konstantin Kilimnik. If the sanctions were ineffective, Putin would never have gone to such lengths to fight them. Moreover, the ban on investment in the Russian debt is far more damaging than the sanctions on individuals. That is where the real bite is in Biden's actions.

It should be noted that the author of this opinion piece, Anatol Lieven, may not be an entirely unbiased source. He is a member of the  Valdai discussion club in Russia, which has close ties to Putin and other Russian government officials. This is not to say that his credentials in the area are weak or that his article shouldn't be considered. He is a respected scholar. Here is what Wikipedia has to say about his club:

The Valdai Discussion Club is a Moscow-based think tank and discussion forum, established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai, which is located close to Veliky Novgorod, where the Club’s first meeting took place. In 2014, the management of the Club was transferred to the Valdai Club Foundation, established in 2011 by the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy, the Russian International Affairs Council, Moscow State Institute of International Relations, and Higher School of Economics.

OVERVIEW

The Valdai conference is closely linked with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has met with the participants of the Valdai Club’s annual meetings every year since its founding. Among many other Russian Government officials attending Valdai meetings are Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister and former President; Sergey Ivanov, former Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office; Sergey Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs; Sergey Shoygu, Minister of Defence; and others.

Daniel W. Drezner, professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, describes Valdai as "a swanky high-level conference put on by the Russian elite." Drezner describes Valdai as "the highest-profile Russian equivalent to Davos" and writes that the chief value to attendees is the ability to determine the official line of the Russian government, although attendance also risks "greater legitimacy on a government that has been accused of some less-than-legitimate activities as of late." Nikolay Petrov of the Carnegie Moscow Center identified Valdai as "a project used as blatant propaganda by the Kremlin" while Russian sociologist Lilia Shevtsova criticized the Valdai conferences in an article entitled "Putin's Useful Idiots." Marcel H. Van Herpen identifies Valdai as a soft power effort by the Kremlin in service of Russian foreign policy goals, with Russian leadership using the conference in a bid to (1) gain goodwill among Western intellectuals, (2) create networking opportunities between Russian and Western elites, and (3) "create a testing ground for the Kremlin's foreign policy initiatives." Angus Roxburgh notes that RIA Novosti was important to the establishment of Valdai during Putin's second term, and that the conference plays a key role in the Russian government's effort to burnish Putin's image and influence outsiders...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Sounds like a long view on Russia's part. Befriend wealthy westerners, offer opportunities for mutually beneficial cooperation, encourage them to adopt the means used by Russian oligarchs to appropriate all the wealth in the country, and eventually and insidiously, pervert American democracy into a caricature of Russian dictatorship with an "economy" owned by oligarchs and mobs.
 
And bounty story, they don't even hide their confidence is "low to moderate".
Some raghead apparently found a way to get from local prison to a US one by bullshiting about bounties.
 
barbos said:
Attack the messenger, not the substance, typical.
Click to expand...

Actually, I didn't attack the messenger by documenting an influence on his perspective. It is quite legitimate to point that out. I also called him a respected scholar whose views should be considered. His ties to the Putin regime should also be considered.

barbos said:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-pun...age-11618651800?mod=searchresults_pos1&page=1

Looks like a lot of experts disagree with our resident linguist.
Click to expand...

This issue has nothing to do with language, so it is you who is attacking the messenger here. Thank you for the reference, but I do not have a subscription to that paywall. What I could see of your article did not go into enough detail for me to respond to it.

barbos said:
And bounty story, they don't even hide their confidence is "low to moderate".
Some raghead apparently found a way to get from local prison to a US one by bullshiting about bounties.
Click to expand...

If Biden had behaved like your government propagandists, he would have simply kept harping on the bounties story. Instead, he walked it back. Why would he do that? This behavior may appear strange to a Russian, but the current administration is concerned about projecting an image of being balanced and accurate when it comes to statements about the Russian government. So this had the effect of toning down a story that had made a lot of Americans outraged. That was actually demonstrating that the Biden administration isn't interested in just smearing Russia. There are enough bad stories about Russian behavior that are entirely accurate and well known. This one doesn't carry the same degree of confidence that other stories do, e.g. Putin's several attempts to assassinate political enemies, his egregious meddling in US elections, his cyberwarfare hacks, or his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
 
Bottom line, there was no bounty, there was no cyber attack, election meddling properly qualified as election influencing and order of magnitude more benign than what US does in Russia, the latest shit in Ukraine is a work of Ukraine itself and you have to thank Russia for military buildup because otherwise these hotheads in Ukraine would put you in awkward position.
 
Last edited:
barbos said:
Bottom line, there was no bounty, there was no cyber attack, election meddling properly qualified as election influencing and order of magnitude more benign than what US does in Russia, the latest shit in Ukraine is a work of Ukraine itself and you have to thank Russia for military buildup because otherwise these hotheads in Ukraine would put you in awkward position.
Click to expand...

That accurately describes the location from which you pulled those assertions. The bounties are unconfirmed. That does not mean they didn't happen. The Solarwinds hack has much more solid intelligence behind it. And Russian interference, including collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence (via Manafort -> Kilimnik) has been known for a long time, not to mention the interference by Russia in elections in Europe and elsewhere. Your gaslighting on Ukraine probably rises above the other gaslighting, but we've all become accustomed to that.

And, in a blast from the past, those two bumbling FSB "tourists" with multiple passports from various countries, Petrov and Boshirov, are back in the news. That's right. Literally a blast. In Czechia.

Salisbury poisoning suspects 'linked to Czech blast'
 
Loren Pechtel said:
barbos said:
Attack the messenger, not the substance, typical.
Click to expand...

This isn't attack the messenger, it's attack the credentials of the expert.
Click to expand...

To be clear, nobody actually attacked the credentials of the expert either. I called him a respected scholar and said that his views should be considered. He had excellent credentials for the subject he was writing about. What wasn't obvious was that he was part of a circle of scholars that has been hosted by the Putin regime for years. That bias was not revealed in the article, but it could be found by looking into his background. I was surprised that he didn't seem to think that the sanctions were effective, even though Putin had spent great effort for years to get them rescinded, even going so far as to meddle directly in US elections. What led me to look up the author's background was that the article sounded less balanced to me than I would have expected from someone with credentials like that.
 
barbos said:
Bottom line, there was no bounty, there was no cyber attack, election meddling properly qualified as election influencing and order of magnitude more benign than what US does in Russia, the latest shit in Ukraine is a work of Ukraine itself and you have to thank Russia for military buildup because otherwise these hotheads in Ukraine would put you in awkward position.
Click to expand...

Bottom line is that there is not definitive evidence of a bounty. At this time. On the other hand, there is much evidence of Russia's harassment of Ukraine. And attempts to meddle with our elections.
 
Cheerful Charlie said:
barbos said:
Bottom line, there was no bounty, there was no cyber attack, election meddling properly qualified as election influencing and order of magnitude more benign than what US does in Russia, the latest shit in Ukraine is a work of Ukraine itself and you have to thank Russia for military buildup because otherwise these hotheads in Ukraine would put you in awkward position.
Click to expand...

Bottom line is that there is not definitive evidence of a bounty.
Click to expand...
That's nice. Should we expect apologies from MSM?
At this time. On the other hand, there is much evidence of Russia's harassment of Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Nope, wrong again.
And attempts to meddle with our elections.
Click to expand...
Not to a larger degree that US does in Russia.
 
barbos said:
That's nice. Should we expect apologies from MSM?
Click to expand...

No. The conclusion that Russia perpetrated that attack was reasonable given the evidence available, even if it wasn't conclusive. Russia has been a 100% malevolent. destructive influence on American society and American interests since the end of WWII, that, combined with the fact of their known capabilities, is sufficient to point the finger squarely at them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom