The Race For 2024

[Tigers!]

Which of your peripheral vision is better - "left" or "right"?

According to the ping-pong ball test, both are at the highest level measurable.

My own crude testing suggests that I can see slightly further to the right than to the left.

I would never have guessed that.

 

[unapologetic]

"Which makes me wonder...what do MAGAS call their progressive lenses? Freedom goggles?"
I'd call them 'blinders'

 

[Henry-Finland]

Do people in the U.S. understand the importance of this election?

If Trump is elected, he will hand over the eastern parts of Ukraine to Russia. Just like that.
China and other dictatorships will see that the West is weak, and every dictator will want a piece of their neighbour and install puppet governments. After this "peace," Putin or his inner circle will rearm and attack again. Once Ukraine is conquered, Moldova will be next, followed by various "-stans," most likely Kazakhstan.

If Trump does not win and Ukraine continues to receive support, Ukraine can become a functioning democracy aligned with the West.
If Ukraine is lost, Russia will turn Ukrainians into soldiers to be used in any war. This is what happened in 1939 when the Winter War broke out between Finland and the Soviet Union.
Just over 10 years earlier, Stalin had starved millions of Ukrainians to death, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor) and at Finland's war front, many more Ukrainians were slaughtered. It was called the Soviet army, but Russian officers primarily led it, and it was mainly Ukrainian soldiers who were fed into the meat grinder.
Stalin wanted to get rid of minority populations. In the current war, minority groups are again being used as cannon fodder.

In Europe, there are also people like Chamberlain and Quisling, but they can be dealt with as long as the democracies of the Western powers prevail.

 

[Elixir]

Many of us get that, Henry. But many are convinced that it’s none of our business and Putin is our last President’s best buddy so what’s the fuss.

 

[bilby]

Americans are still isolationists at heart.

Despite the abject failure of that policy in two world wars.

As Abba Eban observed, "... men and nations do behave wisely, once they have exhausted all other alternatives".

The longer it takes to put Utin back in his box, and make clear that his expansionism will not be tolerated, the harder and bloodier it will become to do so. But it will have to be done eventually.

 

[Henry-Finland]

Many of us get that, Henry. But many are convinced that it’s none of our business and Putin is our last President’s best buddy so what’s the fuss.

If the USA is weak (Trump and his golf properties and towers - all that he cares about) what about Taiwan or Iran will close Hormuz?
The attack of Ukraine (2014 and 2022) would never have happened if the Western countries had not been soft.

 

[bilby]

Maybe. But I want countries to be soft. It shouldn't be necessary for them not to be.

When someone like Utin comes along, they need to stop being soft, for a while. And that takes time. But it's important that it is not a permanent state of affairs.

Strong leaders make for hard times. For everyone.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Do people in the U.S. understand the importance of this election?

If Trump is elected, he will hand over the eastern parts of Ukraine to Russia. Just like that.
China and other dictatorships will see that the West is weak, and every dictator will want a piece of their neighbour and install puppet governments. After this "peace," Putin or his inner circle will rearm and attack again. Once Ukraine is conquered, Moldova will be next, followed by various "-stans," most likely Kazakhstan.

If Trump does not win and Ukraine continues to receive support, Ukraine can become a functioning democracy aligned with the West.
If Ukraine is lost, Russia will turn Ukrainians into soldiers to be used in any war. This is what happened in 1939 when the Winter War broke out between Finland and the Soviet Union.
Just over 10 years earlier, Stalin had starved millions of Ukrainians to death, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor) and at Finland's war front, many more Ukrainians were slaughtered. It was called the Soviet army, but Russian officers primarily led it, and it was mainly Ukrainian soldiers who were fed into the meat grinder.
Stalin wanted to get rid of minority populations. In the current war, minority groups are again being used as cannon fodder.

In Europe, there are also people like Chamberlain and Quisling, but they can be dealt with as long as the democracies of the Western powers prevail.

I wonder how well Russia could even secure Eastern Ukraine should a Trump presidency cut off all US assistance. Would this create a greater sense of urgency in the Nordic countries and Eastern Europe or would they acquiesce? It would depend on how well these peoples understand the importance of Russian aggression.

Going forward I think China will have more influence in Central Asia than Russia. The US will continue to work toward establishing trade routes through the South Caucuses but this will probably be halfhearted at best. Regardless of who is the next US president, the fact will remain that internally the US is politically broken and little if anything externally will be accomplished. Even in the best case scenario with a Harris presidency, every dollar spent outside the US will be shout out loud and hard by Republicans.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

He looks like a person who needs glasses but refuses to get them.

So does Biden.

Both of them look like an older person unaware of the fact that squinting makes you look older than wearing glasses does.
(Adjusts trifocals as I type this…)

I use the modern term "progressive lenses" so I don't feel so old.

Which makes me wonder...what do MAGAS call their progressive lenses? Freedom goggles?

Yah, as explained above, (I’m assuming you actually knew this and were making a joke) these are not progressive lenses, they’re trifocals. Two lines going across dividing the focal zones.

Tri-focals are the humor of truly being deep into late middle age and into elderly. Not only do you now need glasses to read and hence bifocals, but you also need correction for “dashboard distance”, and hence the tri- which is the exactly joke about yes feeling old (being old!)

But since I cannot stand the periferal restrictions of progressive lenses, I will stick happily with my trifocals, TYVM!!

I am having cataract surgery in Nov. If it is not very successful I may need trifocals.

I lost my "very close vision" when I had cataract surgery (reading small print on labels, tightening the tiny screws on my wife's glasses, etc.), but I'm good from about 2 feet to infinity. My doctor did a good job selecting the proper lens correction.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

If we pull support from Ukraine then western Europe has a pretty binary choice. Kick in their own money, hardware, and troops, or let Ukraine fall.

It makes me want to vomit to agree with anything the Shitpants Yam says, but there is truth to be found in NATO spending so little on its defense budget than it has for a long, long time now. It relies on U.S. military might not only to its own detriment, but also at America's expense. Of course, this is helpful to American retention of hegemony and economy with respect to defense contractors, so it's not all one sided.

However, all this talk of Leopard II tanks and the technological advantages of the West's ability to defend itself means nothing with such small numbers. Sure, Putin's an asshole, but he's not afraid of western Europe because he knows that without the U.S. to back them up, and even with the U.S. backing them up, they won't do dick.

Also, this derisive talk of how much America spends on its defense budget gets a little tired when considering the tiny amount that NATO members spend on theirs.

I believe the NATO alliance in invaluable and that the U.S. is obligated to do its part, but nations like Germany, France, and the UK also have a duty to be militarily prepared.

 

[laughing dog]

If we pull support from Ukraine then western Europe has a pretty binary choice. Kick in their own money, hardware, and troops, or let Ukraine fall.

It makes me want to vomit to agree with anything the Shitpants Yam says, but there is truth to be found in NATO spending so little on its defense budget than it has for a long, long time now. It relies on U.S. military might not only to its own detriment, but also at America's expense. Of course, this is helpful to American retention of hegemony and economy with respect to defense contractors, so it's not all one sided.

However, all this talk of Leopard II tanks and the technological advantages of the West's ability to defend itself means nothing with such small numbers. Sure, Putin's an asshole, but he's not afraid of western Europe because he knows that without the U.S. to back them up, and even with the U.S. backing them up, they won't do dick.

Also, this derisive talk of how much America spends on its defense budget gets a little tired when considering the tiny amount that NATO members spend on theirs.

I believe the NATO alliance in invaluable and that the U.S. is obligated to do its part, but nations like Germany, France, and the UK also have a duty to be militarily prepared.

At this juncture, Europe doesn’t have the capacity to successfully help Ukraine by itself.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

If we pull support from Ukraine then western Europe has a pretty binary choice. Kick in their own money, hardware, and troops, or let Ukraine fall.

It makes me want to vomit to agree with anything the Shitpants Yam says, but there is truth to be found in NATO spending so little on its defense budget than it has for a long, long time now. It relies on U.S. military might not only to its own detriment, but also at America's expense. Of course, this is helpful to American retention of hegemony and economy with respect to defense contractors, so it's not all one sided.

However, all this talk of Leopard II tanks and the technological advantages of the West's ability to defend itself means nothing with such small numbers. Sure, Putin's an asshole, but he's not afraid of western Europe because he knows that without the U.S. to back them up, and even with the U.S. backing them up, they won't do dick.

Also, this derisive talk of how much America spends on its defense budget gets a little tired when considering the tiny amount that NATO members spend on theirs.

I believe the NATO alliance in invaluable and that the U.S. is obligated to do its part, but nations like Germany, France, and the UK also have a duty to be militarily prepared.

At this juncture, Europe doesn’t have the capacity to successfully help Ukraine by itself.

And why is that?

It's because they don't want to spend the money to be less than minimally prepared, and that's because they know the U.S. will foot the bill. The world is well post-WW2 and Europe should act accordingly. They'll whine and make fun of how much the U.S. spends on its defense budget, but then beg us for help because they haven't exercised the minimum prudence to adequately plan for Russian aggression.

"Fuck the stupid U.S.!"

Then:

"Please give us war money."

 

[Copernicus]

Do people in the U.S. understand the importance of this election?

If Trump is elected, he will hand over the eastern parts of Ukraine to Russia. Just like that.
China and other dictatorships will see that the West is weak, and every dictator will want a piece of their neighbour and install puppet governments. After this "peace," Putin or his inner circle will rearm and attack again. Once Ukraine is conquered, Moldova will be next, followed by various "-stans," most likely Kazakhstan.

If Trump does not win and Ukraine continues to receive support, Ukraine can become a functioning democracy aligned with the West.
If Ukraine is lost, Russia will turn Ukrainians into soldiers to be used in any war. This is what happened in 1939 when the Winter War broke out between Finland and the Soviet Union.
Just over 10 years earlier, Stalin had starved millions of Ukrainians to death, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor) and at Finland's war front, many more Ukrainians were slaughtered. It was called the Soviet army, but Russian officers primarily led it, and it was mainly Ukrainian soldiers who were fed into the meat grinder.
Stalin wanted to get rid of minority populations. In the current war, minority groups are again being used as cannon fodder.

In Europe, there are also people like Chamberlain and Quisling, but they can be dealt with as long as the democracies of the Western powers prevail.

In the 1930s, a substantial portion of the US population used to be pro-German and pro-Hitler. It wasn't enough to sway the presidential election, but it was definitely large enough to have political influence. Isolationism and nativism in the US were always popular with large numbers, but those influences seem much more mainstream now, when it is much easier to grab a megaphone in social media.

 

[Henry-Finland]

If we pull support from Ukraine then western Europe has a pretty binary choice. Kick in their own money, hardware, and troops, or let Ukraine fall.

It makes me want to vomit to agree with anything the Shitpants Yam says, but there is truth to be found in NATO spending so little on its defense budget than it has for a long, long time now. It relies on U.S. military might not only to its own detriment, but also at America's expense. Of course, this is helpful to American retention of hegemony and economy with respect to defense contractors, so it's not all one sided.

However, all this talk of Leopard II tanks and the technological advantages of the West's ability to defend itself means nothing with such small numbers. Sure, Putin's an asshole, but he's not afraid of western Europe because he knows that without the U.S. to back them up, and even with the U.S. backing them up, they won't do dick.

Also, this derisive talk of how much America spends on its defense budget gets a little tired when considering the tiny amount that NATO members spend on theirs.

I believe the NATO alliance in invaluable and that the U.S. is obligated to do its part, but nations like Germany, France, and the UK also have a duty to be militarily prepared.

At this juncture, Europe doesn’t have the capacity to successfully help Ukraine by itself.

And why is that?

It's because they don't want to spend the money to be less than minimally prepared, and that's because they know the U.S. will foot the bill. The world is well post-WW2 and Europe should act accordingly. They'll whine and make fun of how much the U.S. spends on its defense budget, but then beg us for help because they haven't exercised the minimum prudence to adequately plan for Russian aggression.

"Fuck the stupid U.S.!"

Then:

"Please give us war money."

Not true (anymore).
- The problem is that EU has not enough production capacity, so we buy from USA. Many EU-countries gives more to Ukraine than USA if you count BNP/capita.



- The other problem (about Ukraine) is that USA does not sell e.g. 155 mm cluster bombs (4 million in storage that are meant for scrapping and 3.600 older Abrams that are just a reserve in the Arizona desert.)
USA has also planes that they do not use anymore (Warthdogs?)

You see, even if EU-countries are only building up their production capacity, EU is not lack of money. Uncle Sam needs only to whistle...

 

[Henry-Finland]

Dragon drones - a short video:

Professor Michael Clarke assesses Ukraine's dragon drones​

The Ukrainian Ministry of Defence has released footage of what they say are their new dragon drones in action. The drones appear to drop liquid fire from the sky.Sky's
Military Analyst Professor Michael Clarke explains how these dragon drones work and why they're so terrifying to come up against.

 

[Swammerdami]

Whether through fear of Trump, or fear of Putin, NATO countries have increased their defense budgets. In 2023 only ten NATO countries fulfilled their 2%xGDP = Military requirement. For 2024 that number has soared to twenty-three. Poland and Estonia spent more than the U.S. as percent of GDP. Germany spends $97 Billion.

Sure, the "lion's share" of NATO military spending is still by the U.S. in absolute terms. There was a time when that was a source of pride. It was the U.S. that saved the World from the Scourge of the World War, and then again 25 years later when we learned these Wars would have to be assigned numbers. Once it was a sign of pride that the U.S. saved the world. Twice. But now we need poor countries like Poland to pick up the load since the U.S. has more important ways to spend its trillions.

Elon Musk has only a quarter of a trillion dollars, and even less on days when Tesla downturns, Shouldn't he have half a trillion at least? There are only 150 million iPhones in the U.S. with many impoverished Americans making do with Samsungs or worse. Shouldn't we address this gap before we pay for more munitions to send to Ukraine?

And anyway, what's the matter with Vladimir Putin? He's a likeable virile guy, already on excellent terms with our Once and Future President. Let Poland and Germany cope with him if they seem inclined.

NATO is defunct. Putin is our top ally! Make America Great Again.

 

[Tigers!]

He looks like a person who needs glasses but refuses to get them.

So does Biden.

Both of them look like an older person unaware of the fact that squinting makes you look older than wearing glasses does.
(Adjusts trifocals as I type this…)

I use the modern term "progressive lenses" so I don't feel so old.

Which makes me wonder...what do MAGAS call their progressive lenses? Freedom goggles?

Yah, as explained above, (I’m assuming you actually knew this and were making a joke) these are not progressive lenses, they’re trifocals. Two lines going across dividing the focal zones.

Tri-focals are the humor of truly being deep into late middle age and into elderly. Not only do you now need glasses to read and hence bifocals, but you also need correction for “dashboard distance”, and hence the tri- which is the exactly joke about yes feeling old (being old!)

But since I cannot stand the periferal restrictions of progressive lenses, I will stick happily with my trifocals, TYVM!!

I am having cataract surgery in Nov. If it is not very successful I may need trifocals.

I lost my "very close vision" when I had cataract surgery (reading small print on labels, tightening the tiny screws on my wife's glasses, etc.), but I'm good from about 2 feet to infinity. My doctor did a good job selecting the proper lens correction.

At the moment I am appalling from about 20cm (7") to about 60cm (2') foot and terrible at long distance. My bifocal glasses are ok at the long but it is terrible up close. My computer monitor is very close to my face compared to other fellow workers.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

If we pull support from Ukraine then western Europe has a pretty binary choice. Kick in their own money, hardware, and troops, or let Ukraine fall.

It makes me want to vomit to agree with anything the Shitpants Yam says, but there is truth to be found in NATO spending so little on its defense budget than it has for a long, long time now. It relies on U.S. military might not only to its own detriment, but also at America's expense. Of course, this is helpful to American retention of hegemony and economy with respect to defense contractors, so it's not all one sided.

However, all this talk of Leopard II tanks and the technological advantages of the West's ability to defend itself means nothing with such small numbers. Sure, Putin's an asshole, but he's not afraid of western Europe because he knows that without the U.S. to back them up, and even with the U.S. backing them up, they won't do dick.

Also, this derisive talk of how much America spends on its defense budget gets a little tired when considering the tiny amount that NATO members spend on theirs.

I believe the NATO alliance in invaluable and that the U.S. is obligated to do its part, but nations like Germany, France, and the UK also have a duty to be militarily prepared.

At this juncture, Europe doesn’t have the capacity to successfully help Ukraine by itself.

And why is that?

It's because they don't want to spend the money to be less than minimally prepared, and that's because they know the U.S. will foot the bill. The world is well post-WW2 and Europe should act accordingly. They'll whine and make fun of how much the U.S. spends on its defense budget, but then beg us for help because they haven't exercised the minimum prudence to adequately plan for Russian aggression.

"Fuck the stupid U.S.!"

Then:

"Please give us war money."

Not true (anymore).
- The problem is that EU has not enough production capacity, so we buy from USA. Many EU-countries gives more to Ukraine than USA if you count BNP/capita.

View attachment 48053

- The other problem (about Ukraine) is that USA does not sell e.g. 155 mm cluster bombs (4 million in storage that are meant for scrapping and 3.600 older Abrams that are just a reserve in the Arizona desert.)
USA has also planes that they do not use anymore (Warthdogs?)

You see, even if EU-countries are only building up their production capacity, EU is not lack of money. Uncle Sam needs only to whistle...

And what's that in terms of REAL money?

Pedantry and excuse making only proves you have a weak argument. And how much does America's military spending ensure that Europe doesn't have to? How about this: have the U.S. withhold all support from Ukraine and let's see how that goes.

 

[laughing dog]

If we pull support from Ukraine then western Europe has a pretty binary choice. Kick in their own money, hardware, and troops, or let Ukraine fall.

It makes me want to vomit to agree with anything the Shitpants Yam says, but there is truth to be found in NATO spending so little on its defense budget than it has for a long, long time now. It relies on U.S. military might not only to its own detriment, but also at America's expense. Of course, this is helpful to American retention of hegemony and economy with respect to defense contractors, so it's not all one sided.

However, all this talk of Leopard II tanks and the technological advantages of the West's ability to defend itself means nothing with such small numbers. Sure, Putin's an asshole, but he's not afraid of western Europe because he knows that without the U.S. to back them up, and even with the U.S. backing them up, they won't do dick.

Also, this derisive talk of how much America spends on its defense budget gets a little tired when considering the tiny amount that NATO members spend on theirs.

I believe the NATO alliance in invaluable and that the U.S. is obligated to do its part, but nations like Germany, France, and the UK also have a duty to be militarily prepared.

At this juncture, Europe doesn’t have the capacity to successfully help Ukraine by itself.

And why is that?

It's because they don't want to spend the money to be less than minimally prepared, and that's because they know the U.S. will foot the bill. The world is well post-WW2 and Europe should act accordingly. They'll whine and make fun of how much the U.S. spends on its defense budget, but then beg us for help because they haven't exercised the minimum prudence to adequately plan for Russian aggression.

"Fuck the stupid U.S.!"

Then:

"Please give us war money."

That explains how Europe got to this point but does not address the current situation.
Without US aid, Ukraine falls to Russia.

 

[bilby]

It was the U.S. that saved the World from the Scourge of the World War, and then again 25 years later when we learned these Wars would have to be assigned numbers.

The US contribution to the Great War was far too little, and too late to be particularly important. It secured a place for the US as a "victor", enabling her to share some of the spoils, and to have a say in developing the treaty of Versailles. But by the time US troops arrived on the Western Front, the outcome of the war was no longer in doubt.

The US helped to prevent the war from continuing into 1919, but realistically it would have ended in the spring of that year with an Anglo-French defeat of Germany, even if the US had remained neutral.

To describe the closing months of the Great War with the suggestion that the US "saved the World from the Scourge of the World War" is an ahistorcal absurdity.

The US certainly saved Western Europe in WWII, once they finally overcame their strong isolationist streak (which withstood every indignity, short of a direct and devastating attack on their navy, while it was docked in a home port).

So that's one "step in on the winning side after it's almost over, so they could be counted a victor rather than a neutral", and one "wait until they were directly and personally attacked"; Hardly the actions of some heroic saviour.