Loose lips and drunk SOD

[barbos]

The war is about the west trying to destroy Russia using Ukraine.

As if we started it.
PUTIN started it.

Marco Rubio disagrees.

 

[unapologetic]

The war is about the west trying to destroy Russia using Ukraine.

As if we started it.
PUTIN started it.

Marco Rubio disagrees.

Nobody cares what he thinks.

 

[barbos]

The war is about the west trying to destroy Russia using Ukraine.

As if we started it.
PUTIN started it.

Marco Rubio disagrees.

Nobody cares what he thinks.

I know, you only care what Kaja Kallas thinks.

 

[Elixir]

Kaja Kallas

Who the fuck is that?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

 

[Bronzeage]

The usual suspect here are bitching about incompetence as usual. And they are incompetent.
But in this particular case it looks like a deliberate act. The theory is, Waltz is an anti-iran neocon who tried to use this neocon journalist for leaks. But things went off side when said journalist decided it was too much info for him.

Jeff Goldberg is a neocon journalist? You need to go back and read your notes. I'm sure your handler did not call Jeff Goldberg a neocon journalist. You should probably look up definition of unfamiliar words before you make a post like this.

 

[laughing dog]

Kaja Kallas

Who the fuck is that?

VP of the European Commision. Ms Kallas is Estonian which means she is well acquainted with her eastern neighbor, Russia.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Bronzeage]

That is what the war is about. So until it is over, STFU.

Nope. The war is about the west trying to destroy Russia using Ukraine.
So far it's been failing spectacularly.

Russia must have a different concept of spectacular failure than the rest of the world. At this point, Russia is on it's knees. Hundreds of thousands of Russian men are dead and it's very likely another hundred thousand will die before it's over. Ukraine can strike Russian assets at will and Russia has no practical defense. Russia has gone from being a world power to being a pathetic helpless giant.

There may not have been a plan to destroy Russia, but that will be the final result.

 

[Swammerdami]

The usual suspect here are bitching about incompetence as usual. And they are incompetent.
But in this particular case it looks like a deliberate act. The theory is, Waltz is an anti-iran neocon who tried to use this neocon journalist for leaks. But things went off side when said journalist decided it was too much info for him.

Jeff Goldberg is a neocon journalist? You need to go back and read your notes. I'm sure your handler did not call Jeff Goldberg a neocon journalist. You should probably look up definition of unfamiliar words before you make a post like this.

The term "Neocon" is bandied about and ambiguous, but if support for Israel and the Bush-Cheney misadventure in Iraq are the litmus tests, then Goldberg qualifies:

[He] served in the Israel Defense Forces during the First Intifada as a prison guard at Ktzi'ot Prison, where Palestinian participants arrested in the uprising were held.
...
Glenn Greenwald called Goldberg "one of the leading media cheerleaders for the attack on Iraq", saying Goldberg had "compiled a record of humiliating falsehood-dissemination in the run-up to the war that rivaled Judy Miller's both in terms of recklessness and destructive impact".[50] In his 2008 article in Slate titled "How Did I Get Iraq Wrong?", Goldberg explained why he initially supported the Iraq War and wrote that he "didn't realize how incompetent the Bush administration could be."[51]

Was the leakage to Goldberg deliberate? Probably not, but what's unfolding in Washington is an absurdist nightmare so who can be sure?

Is there ANY historical precedent for utter absurdity on the scale we see today? AFAIK only the amazing story of Marozia di Roma comes close.

 

[Swammerdami]

Axios posted an analysis of the Signal chat, which I excerpt. Trumpist arrogance is on full display: "Stay focused on Biden failed"; "if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?"

3. Disagreement over "messaging," not military strategy: Domestic politics and foreign policy are always intertwined, but it's particularly glaring in text message form.

There is no debate in the messages Goldberg shared about the likely military effectiveness of the strikes in Yemen. Such conversations may well have taken place in other settings. But what is on display in the leaked texts is a discussion of how to shape the narrative at home.
"I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what – nobody knows who the Houthis are – which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded," Hegseth wrote in response to Vance's concerns that the plan would be contrary to Trump's "message on Europe."

4. They really can't stand the Europeans.

Vance's disdain for European political elites isn't just political theater. Here, he argued against strikes that he felt would mainly benefit Europe — and thus should be up to the Europeans to execute.

Even after Waltz and others responded with evidence that only the U.S. could execute such an operation, Vance replied, "I just hate bailing Europe out again."
"I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It's PATHETIC," Hegseth wrote back.

The intrigue: A user identified as "SM" (possibly Stephen Miller) added that they would ensure the Europeans and Egyptians knew "what we expect in return," and said the question was "if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?"

"If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return," the user continues.

 

[barbos]

The usual suspect here are bitching about incompetence as usual. And they are incompetent.
But in this particular case it looks like a deliberate act. The theory is, Waltz is an anti-iran neocon who tried to use this neocon journalist for leaks. But things went off side when said journalist decided it was too much info for him.

Jeff Goldberg is a neocon journalist? You need to go back and read your notes. I'm sure your handler did not call Jeff Goldberg a neocon journalist. You should probably look up definition of unfamiliar words before you make a post like this.

Yes, he is a neocon.

 

[barbos]

Was the leakage to Goldberg deliberate? Probably not

Then they should provide believable theory on how that mishap happened.
Right now, it looks like it was impossible to make that by mistake.

 

[barbos]

That is what the war is about. So until it is over, STFU.

Nope. The war is about the west trying to destroy Russia using Ukraine.
So far it's been failing spectacularly.

Russia must have a different concept of spectacular failure than the rest of the world. At this point, Russia is on it's knees. Hundreds of thousands of Russian men are dead and it's very likely another hundred thousand will die before it's over. Ukraine can strike Russian assets at will and Russia has no practical defense. Russia has gone from being a world power to being a pathetic helpless giant.

There may not have been a plan to destroy Russia, but that will be the final result.

Bullshit, utter bullshit and flat out lies.

 

[marc]

SNL opening

 

[Toni]

The usual suspect here are bitching about incompetence as usual. And they are incompetent.
But in this particular case it looks like a deliberate act. The theory is, Waltz is an anti-iran neocon who tried to use this neocon journalist for leaks. But things went off side when said journalist decided it was too much info for him.

Jeff Goldberg is a neocon journalist? You need to go back and read your notes. I'm sure your handler did not call Jeff Goldberg a neocon journalist. You should probably look up definition of unfamiliar words before you make a post like this.

The term "Neocon" is bandied about and ambiguous, but if support for Israel and the Bush-Cheney misadventure in Iraq are the litmus tests, then Goldberg qualifies:

[He] served in the Israel Defense Forces during the First Intifada as a prison guard at Ktzi'ot Prison, where Palestinian participants arrested in the uprising were held.
...
Glenn Greenwald called Goldberg "one of the leading media cheerleaders for the attack on Iraq", saying Goldberg had "compiled a record of humiliating falsehood-dissemination in the run-up to the war that rivaled Judy Miller's both in terms of recklessness and destructive impact".[50] In his 2008 article in Slate titled "How Did I Get Iraq Wrong?", Goldberg explained why he initially supported the Iraq War and wrote that he "didn't realize how incompetent the Bush administration could be."[51]

Was the leakage to Goldberg deliberate? Probably not, but what's unfolding in Washington is an absurdist nightmare so who can be sure?

Is there ANY historical precedent for utter absurdity on the scale we see today? AFAIK only the amazing story of Marozia di Roma comes close.

I could see the argument that the leak to Goldberg was intentional. There is a vague possibility that there exists among that group of men some individuals visual who is not an absolute traitor. In Trump’s first administration, there were a handful of people who stayed as long as they could, hoping to keep everything from going completely off the rails. No doubt there are a few amongst the apparent acolytes who have some shred of decency and patriotism left or at least a few misgivings.

I genuinely don’t know or understand what hold Trump has over the GOP. Some few are true believers if nothing else, believers in the grift. But I’ve read suggestions that many are seriously afraid for the safety of their family—in which case the only safer thing to do is to go public, loud and clear. Or get Lindsay Graham to do it.

 

[Toni]

Axios posted an analysis of the Signal chat, which I excerpt. Trumpist arrogance is on full display: "Stay focused on Biden failed"; "if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?"

3. Disagreement over "messaging," not military strategy: Domestic politics and foreign policy are always intertwined, but it's particularly glaring in text message form.

There is no debate in the messages Goldberg shared about the likely military effectiveness of the strikes in Yemen. Such conversations may well have taken place in other settings. But what is on display in the leaked texts is a discussion of how to shape the narrative at home.
"I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what – nobody knows who the Houthis are – which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded," Hegseth wrote in response to Vance's concerns that the plan would be contrary to Trump's "message on Europe."

4. They really can't stand the Europeans.

Vance's disdain for European political elites isn't just political theater. Here, he argued against strikes that he felt would mainly benefit Europe — and thus should be up to the Europeans to execute.

Even after Waltz and others responded with evidence that only the U.S. could execute such an operation, Vance replied, "I just hate bailing Europe out again."
"I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It's PATHETIC," Hegseth wrote back.

The intrigue: A user identified as "SM" (possibly Stephen Miller) added that they would ensure the Europeans and Egyptians knew "what we expect in return," and said the question was "if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?"

"If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return," the user continues.

I cannot help but wonder if Vance is a sleeper, playing a necessary role in this farce until Trump is safely off the stage, preferably in the grave.* I don’t think he’s actually stupid, even if he is better at telling his side of a story with as much drama as necessary to sell a book. And he’s extremely ambitious. But unfortunately also in the thrall of or at least whiskey to Peter Thiel,

 

[barbos]

There is a vague possibility that there exists among that group of men some individuals visual who is not an absolute traitor.

Then it must be Waltz

 

[Swammerdami]

OMG. Are you pro-DEI atheists still prattling about Imbecilegate? Desi Lydic explains that this is all a big nothing-burger. Don't forget that Hillary Clinton stored detailed blueprints for the Hydrogen Bomb on her server, and the GOP had the good grace to barely mention that.

As explained by America's favorite news channel, revealing the UNCLASSIFIED attack chat was a DELIBERATE demonstration of transparency.

MAGA --- Mexico's Awesome Gulf is America's again.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Axios posted an analysis of the Signal chat, which I excerpt. Trumpist arrogance is on full display: "Stay focused on Biden failed"; "if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?"

3. Disagreement over "messaging," not military strategy: Domestic politics and foreign policy are always intertwined, but it's particularly glaring in text message form.

There is no debate in the messages Goldberg shared about the likely military effectiveness of the strikes in Yemen. Such conversations may well have taken place in other settings. But what is on display in the leaked texts is a discussion of how to shape the narrative at home.
"I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what – nobody knows who the Houthis are – which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded," Hegseth wrote in response to Vance's concerns that the plan would be contrary to Trump's "message on Europe."

4. They really can't stand the Europeans.

Vance's disdain for European political elites isn't just political theater. Here, he argued against strikes that he felt would mainly benefit Europe — and thus should be up to the Europeans to execute.

Even after Waltz and others responded with evidence that only the U.S. could execute such an operation, Vance replied, "I just hate bailing Europe out again."
"I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It's PATHETIC," Hegseth wrote back.

The intrigue: A user identified as "SM" (possibly Stephen Miller) added that they would ensure the Europeans and Egyptians knew "what we expect in return," and said the question was "if Europe doesn't remunerate, then what?"

"If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return," the user continues.

I cannot help but wonder if Vance is a sleeper, playing a necessary role in this farce until Trump is safely off the stage, preferably in the grave.* I don’t think he’s actually stupid, even if he is better at telling his side of a story with as much drama as necessary to sell a book. And he’s extremely ambitious. But unfortunately also in the thrall of or at least whiskey to Peter Thiel,

The worst part is that I have no idea what the goal is of the people running Trump's administration. Are they nothing but Pakleds or do they have a nefarious goal or are they somewhere in between like the Neocons and Iraq... ie competent but deluded as all heck?