The U.S. was advised toward a "Marshall Plan" to help rebuild post-Soviet Russia as a democracy, but a key witness says the Cold War never ended, because we didn't want it to
It’s absolutely astonishing how often these days I read articles or interviews where people say such things as: “In 1989 when I was advisor to the Polish government,” or “When I was advisor to Yeltsin…” (both Mr. Sachs), or “When I was briefing President Kennedy…”(Ray McGovern), “When I exposed Mei Lai…” (Seymour Hersh),
Or even, “When I played basketball for Outer Mongolia…” (Taibbi), or, “When I was chief arms inspector in Iraq…”, (Ritter). The point is that none of these essential minds are available to readers of the TimesPostCNNo’sphere. No wonder those people are clueless. They’re left with Krugman abusing himself with his Nobel Prize.
To all of the people who were really there, took chances, made sacrifices, did good, hard, work, and just, fucking, mattered.
Thanks to all of you, and thank the Gods that there’s a home for your words still, sparse though the crowd may be, (for now).
Well said, well said. It is professionally unforgivable that the high-status media did not send their best journalists to exactly these persons, in the thick of the events they analyse, with their insider knowledge, and did not open their pages to them. The NYT has slammed the door on Sachs. It has slammed the door on journalism. So journalism is not what it is about. It is an institution within a system, and it is a servant of the system. That system appears to be depend on US domination. Same for just about all the leading Western media (I live in Germany, and it is no different among the so-called status media here).
The USA is a ripe goose to be plundered. There is money to be made hand over fist and the US government is doling it out. Do we want it to go to Russians or our own oligarchs??
I don’t agree with Professor Sachs on everything, but he is over the target calling out the neocon warmongers. Like many other truth tellers, he has been black balled from MSM. Thanks for featuring him here. Hope he starts a Substack. Perhaps he can advise the Trump administration or even become Secretary of State…
"They sought and until today seek a unipolar world led by a hegemonic US, in which Russia and other nations will be subservient."
And looking back with the benefit of history, their failure has been nothing less than catastrophic. Failed wars of choice, collapsing infrastructure, rejection of the dollar standard, and the usurpation of U.S. global hegemony by the BRICS, led by China.
I saw Sen Ron Johnson, Chair of Homeland Sec and Govt Affairs Cmmte, say in an interview with Greenwald, that we had pursued the same strategy in every conflict since since Vietnam and it always failed to meet any objectives. He was quite good and I don't know why we're stuck with insane neocons
The reason we are stuck with the insane neocons is because they never suffer the consequences for their messes and failures, that, and that they are backed by the CMIC whose shares are owned by both neocons and neoliberals.
Which is to say that my guess is that the motivation for initiating the policy was mostly laziness, of the sort associated with triumphalism and dominant power. Like, here comes Victor Capitalism. Let the Defeated sort their condition out for themselves, it's easier that way. For the Victorious, at least. In the short run.
Some of Sachs’ liberal views don’t appeal to me, but isn’t his honesty refreshing? Honesty is now our most valued commodity since it’s been suppressed for too long.
Isn’t this why Matt, Walter, Dr Sachs, and Yuri have a loyal following?
Congressional report - How the Clinton Administration Exported Government Instead of Free Enterprise and Failed the Russian People
Russia's rampant capital flight, estimated at as much as $500 billion since Russian independence, is another serious consequence of corruption and organized crime. The culmination of the Clinton administration's fatally-flawed macroeconomic policy for Russia occurred in August 1998, when Russia's default on its debts and devaluation of the ruble led to the nation's total economic collapse. Millions of ordinary men and women who had deposited their money in Russian banks lost everything. ATM and debit cards ceased to work. Dozens of banks became insolvent and disappeared. Angry depositors besieged Russian banks, only to learn they had been wiped out. Millions of senior citizens, whose meager pension income had been suspended for months, were cut off completely. When the dust finally settled in March 1999, the ruble--and with it, every Russian's life savings—had lost fully 75% of its value.
And what purpose would that serve? Intriguing and cute, certainly, but they could as well dismantle NATO. Was’t the idea of NATO to defend the West from a potential threat from the socialist block?
The front for NATO was defence but NATO has NEVER legally fought a defensive war, even when the wars were legally permitted, they were based on lies making those wars illegal.
Do you realize that the US practically fought against the Soviet Army after they invaded the Afghanistan? The US supported and armed Taliban as their proxy against the USSR.
Nah, I don't think so, Russia has been lied to and screwed over so many times there's zero trust left, Putin has sad as much and now he has the rest of the world at his back, admittedly to varying degrees..
Too bad Putin violated the Minsk Agreement and invaded Ukraine. He views treaties as tools to control others but not binding on him. "Nov 2, 2023 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin on Thursday signed a law withdrawing Russia's ratification of the global treaty banning nuclear weapons tests, a step condemned by the organisation which promotes adherence to the landmark arms control pact."
Odd, as Ukraine promptly broke the Minsk Accord, and had fullilled precisely none of its ob obligations under Minsk-2, which Poroshenko, holladne and Merkel all admitted was always a sham intended to buy Ukraine time.
Odd. Then why did Putin feel a need to announce the end of Minsk 2 two days before invading? "Russia went on to officially recognise the self-proclaimed Luhansk and Donetsk people's republics on 21 February 2022.[9] Following that decision, on 22 February 2022, President Putin said that the Minsk agreements "no longer existed", and that Ukraine, not Russia, was to blame for their collapse, accusing Ukraine of genocide in Donbas in his comments[97][98][10] – a statement largely seen as baseless and factually wrong by the wider world, academics studying genocide, and the United Nations.[99][100][101][102] Russia then invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022.[
I believe the U.S., too, has withdrawn from treaties that no longer suited its purposes. This is not to say that Putin is in the right, only that there is nothing exceptional about a sovereign nation leaving a treaty.
I don't love Jeffrey Sachs, but he makes a compelling case that our policy towards Russia was created and implemented by complete fucktards in a series of Administrations, both Republican and Democrat. The mess we now have on our hands is entirely the fault of these self-dealing neo-com imbeciles. Victoria Nuland - I'm looking at you.
I read the comment that goes like yours, I don't love Sachs, or something of the kind, and why is that? I don't need anyone to tell me Russia bad since I grew up hearing that from my teachers and everyone else. I'm glad I never had such black and white thinking about things, even as a kid which the US depends on from it's people in it's vilification of Russia, all facts to contrary. In psychology such thinking is considered, well, sick. Your right about those neocons and they are in bed with the democratic party. They shifted from the republican party to the democrats and find themselves in love.
Russia is not bad. But the communists were pure evil. And Putin has become a corrupt autocrat. Problem is our neocons, State Dept clowns and CIA dipsticks are equally despotic and foul.
The Russian people were forced to make that sacrifice. As Stalin and his commisars sat warm and well fed, far away from the front. What planet do you live on?
As I said to someone else who had the same slant on Russia do you at least appreciate the fact that with their profound loss of life and sacrifices during WWII they won that war for the world, and Nazi Germany did not?
My public education didn’t teach me to hate Russia. Its focus was Hitler and Germany. It would have been good had I learned not hate, but at least some of the facts about the outcomes of Communism.
It is frequently true that it is the government, the elite who are responsible for evil and not the common person. Radical Islam infesting certain countries is an exception.
This country has repeatedly told people to hate, to mistrust Russia, It did so in it's many drills that kids diving under their desks, pulling down window shades to protect children to blinding light of a nuclear attack or had them standing in the hall during one of those drills. They turned Russia into the boogie man for children. With adults they spewed their hate through the TV or the radio. All this during a period when we were rampaging through South America, a Korean war and one in one in Vietnam. Not to mention our assistance in Indonesia's communist purge that killed almost a million people. Who am I afraid of, well, I'm afraid of US.
Thanks for the reply. You cover a lot of the ground in your response. The diving under desks was before my time. The Korean and Vietnam wars? Communism was a real threat and its current western variant is as well.
Do i think all we’ve done “just”? No.
As a citizen am I required to do what I can to make things better here? Yes.
I am not afraid of the typical American, “US”. I am afraid of the oligarchs and of those of our “elite” who are largely brainwashed, stupid, evil, or some mix of the three.
Possibly but I read it as "the Cold Warriors screwed up my perfect solution." I guess the mea culpa is he lost out to them. I tend to agree with the pieces he cited that he wrote but there is a lack of humility that I find self-serving.
Using Ukrainian lives in our proxy war against Russia, and knowing full well there will be hundreds and hundreds of the thousand that are dead as a result to me is no different then a genocide. No wonder the US has no conscience in supplying weapons to Israel to carry out a genocide of it's own.
It freaking kills me to see older people in the circles I frequent, people who were in vocal in the day opposing the Vietnam war, sporting blue and yellow stickers on the back of their cars like some badge of honor. I just want to shake them and yell, " I guess the MIC is just dandy if you aren't being drafted for it then you hypocrite!"
Most people you talk to on this issue, have been raised to hate, or mistrust Russia, and it remains a given for the rest of their lives, a religion of sorts. So if the US lies as to it's reasons for this proxy war and Zelensky cries and bemoans what is happening, well of course it's all Russia's fault, since they are and always have been the enemy, except in WWII,
I can see that. I also think it's because they don't have skin in the game. A traditionally vilified Boogeyman that one doesn't actually have to face certainly seems to give license to some to abstract and devalue other's lives.
on edit: Yeah, they were our WWII allies, but I remember hearing armchair generals in my childhood opining that Patton should have just pressed through to Moscow...
They are also their own proxies. The Ukrainians don't want to be ruled (again) by Russia. Whether we are self-interested in helping them is not relevant to the fact that Ukrainians prefer self-government.
Yeah good for them, however when the US helps implement a coup whose purpose was to use Ukraine to bring down Russia that's quite a different story. We've used them and hundreds of thousands of lives have been destroyed, a country has been destroyed. I don't blame Russia, but do blame the US. When Biden came back from his trip to Ukraine his senility certainly let the cat out of the bag when he said Putin has got to go, and really that's what it is all about. When we can help Israel implement a genocide, killing thousands upon thousands of children, kill their parents, their families, and put them as risk for communicable diseases and watch them go hungry, as Israel also cuts off their food supply, well, you know we're just no good. When our representatives can give Netanyahu a standing ovation you know we are bastards! By the way I don't want to negate the mothers and fathers they kill turning children into orphans. Also the death toll is no doubt three or four times higher since most of the dead, especially children rot under the rubble.
SOME Ukrainians don’t want to be ruled by Russia, primarily the ones in the western half that used to be part of the Austrian Empire. But many of those in the eastern half, which was part of Russia for hundreds of years, not only want to be ruled by Russia but speak Russian, not Ukrainian, as their first language and identify as Russian rather than Ukrainian. It had been a divided country ever since it began its existence as an independent nation-state in 1991, which is why its neutrality between Russia and the West was written into its constitution—until, of course, the CIA-sponsored 2014 coup d’état that overthrew the democratically elected president that was trying to maintain its neutrality, which is when the war started.
Speaking Russian does not equate to wanting to be ruled by Russia. Yanukovych was not neutral. He was a Russian puppet who fled to Russia. "In November 2013, a wave of large-scale protests known as "Euromaidan" began in response to President Yanukovych's decision not to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the European Union (EU), instead choosing closer ties to Russia. Euromaidan soon developed into the largest democratic mass movement in Europe since 1989."
The narrative that the CIA made Ukrainians want to trade with the EU and not be under Russia's heed is standard Putin propaganda. Sadly, many men in eastern Ukraine were pressed into service to die for the Russian invasion.
That’s bullshit. Yanukovych was hardly a puppet. He was trying to maintain Ukraine’s traditional neutrality in the face of the USA pushing to get it to join NATO and the EU pushing it to join the EU, both of which posed obvious threats to Russia. He fled to Russia after he was overthrown by the CIA-backed coup because where else would he go? That’s when the war started because many of those in the eastern part of Ukraine, especially those whose first language is Russian, many of whom identify as Russian, didn’t want to be ruled by a Western-backed puppet government who were attacking the linguistic, political and cultural rights of Russian-speakers.
This isn’t Putin propaganda; it’s the truth, as Jeffrey Sachs, who knows more about the region than pretty much anyone else in the West, points out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWYZpF2ngnc
Putin planned the invasion for years, building up a war chest. He had no intention of leaving Ukraine alone. He wanted a second bite of the apple. His miscalculation was that the West would ignore it again. Ooops. Now Putin is mired in sanctions, destroyed refineries, and losing troops and equipment in huge numbers. Of course, that could turn around if Ukraine doesn't continue to receive aid.
Perhaps you can provide evidence for this, especially as the Ukrainian military was collapsing after Ukraine broke the origina Minsk Accord, It was Ukraine, not Russia, which begged for Minsk-2, which Poroshenko, Merkel and Hollande all agreed was a sham that Ukraine never intended to fulfill.
Yes, and have been since ‘45. We lost our minds over Russia in 1918, but the hegemonic delusion really kicked into overdrive after WWII. We broke bread with Nazis to help us subvert all things Russia, and that started before the war ended in Europe. We are the evil empire, much as it pains me to say it.
Ignoring the fact that in 1917, "Russia" became an ethnic society within a Bolshevik totalitarian state ensures a one-sided and skewed view of history. Read Anthony Beavor's history of the Spanish Civil war, or any neutral study of soviet expansionism from 1917 on. International communism is and was a thing. The current Russian government, born out of the second Russian revolution, of 1989-1994, is a more or less "new" form of government never seen before during the Soviet period, or under the tsars.
The history of democratic traditions in Europe is worth studying. Polond, Romania, and almost all eastern European nations have almost no democratic tradition prior to the 1990s. Even in western Europe, the history of democracy is very short. Empire colonialism was practiced by Holland, Portugal, Spain, France, and Great Britain post-1945. Witness Dutch attempts post liberation from the Nazis to reimpose colonial authority over Indonesia and the resulting wars, or the French in Viet Nam. The former Soviet Union and the Chinese communist state funded and assisted nationalist/communist insurgencies across the globe.
We have managed to place ourselves on the threshold of nuclear conflagration at a point in history where there is less starvation, lack of potable water, or people dying from conflicts than at any point in modern history. Good for us!
If you don’t think we’re practicing empire colonialism, you’re naive, or propagandized, or both. From countless wars, coups, terrorism via our support for right-wing dictators, undermining countless third world countries via sanctions or World Bank/IMF blackmail, we’ve caused far more death, misery, and destruction than all the communist insurgencies combined, and it ain’t close.
Read The Jakarta Method, read The Devils’s Chessboard, read Overthrow. We gave the world MacDonalds and Coke and a corrupt capitalism that threatens our very existence as a species. Good for us? Comedy gold, that.
At no point did I dispute Sachs/Klein's contentions re: empire colonialism. I've stated for years that the way to think of US foreign policy in the 2020s is that of the Ohio Company of Virginia looking west at a continent controlled by "savages" and competing European economic interests north, south, and west, only in the 2020's the riches are all east of Germany's borders. Sachs on US "full spectrum dominance" in every area of the globe is very clear on this topic.
What I am saying, contra you, is that we need to place all the relevant facts within an accurate historical context. You omit all references to the totalitarian anti-freedom priorities at the heart of international communism, policies explicitly stated by defenders of communism over decades.
What does that totalitarianism mean in practice? No Substack, no capitalism, no private property, zero free speech, no freedom to travel. Gulags, poverty, incivility, corruption, inequality, and state censorship and state terrorism against the citizenry on a scale you clearly cannot imagine. We'd already be in camps, or dead, not posting on Twitter. Fact.
Putin is credited by Russian defenders for being kinda/sorta capable of curtailing some of the power of the oligarch/gangsters who actually control much of Russia's modern economy.
All of us, all nations, are doing our 'best' within the systems we've inherited, not designed. Can we do better? We're finding that out as we speak. Already, the first half of the 2000s is off to a much better start than the 20th century. The world is a much, much, much better place than in was even 50 years ago. Which is why the current conflicts, domestic and abroad, are so indefensible.
This is exactly where Sachs lost me. In 1945, the USSR was the greatest threat to the world. Its open and active mission to spread international communism, which they executed to great effect, was at the center of all western foreign policy for 50 years. International Communism was responsible for the murder of over 100 million people. Suddenly, we have complete amnesia about all of this? Is the death toll simply too large to comprehend?
Allying with the Soviets to defeat the Nazis was a deal with the devil.
That said, I doubt the continuity of communist ideology between pre and post USSR Russia.
I don't think we are the baddies, exactly — I realize I'm a minority in this room — but it's fair to say that the situation is complicated and has a long history, and that we have passed up opportunities to improve it.
No one can say for sure what would have happened if Sachs's recommendations were followed. I agree with him that we should have tried, but Russian culture does not seem to be fertile ground for democracy, and culture is not something that can be changed easily. Yes, Germany and Japan after WWII went from militaristic to pacifistic, but look what that required: massive military defeat and occupation. I am not saying a Marshall Plan for Russia couldn't have worked, but its success was certainly not guaranteed.
But let's imagine that, although we didn't attempt Marshall Plan-scale economic stabilization of Russia, we did hold back on NATO expansion, as George Kennan recommended. What would have happened? Again, we can't be certain, but I think the argument that Russia and Ukraine would have resolved their differences peaceably is a difficult one to make. The Kremlin is full of warmongers too, and the Ukrainians, I think understandably, feel a considerable amount of anti-Russian sentiment after centuries of subjugation. This war was quite predictable, if not inevitable, and indeed was predicted by Russian politician Eduard Limonov in 1992. This is an emotional rant, not a dispassionate analysis, and I certainly don't endorse everything Limonov says, but it's worth watching anyway to get an idea of how Russians saw Ukraine's independence already in 1992: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoJoZD2I8us After pointing out that nationalist sentiment was likely to lead to war, he then indulges in it himself, by arguing that the Donbas and Crimea should be returned to Russia.
I could go into more depth, but the short version is that I think the Ukrainians have known, probably since 1991 but certainly since 2006, that they would be faced with a choice between becoming a puppet state of Russia, like Belarus, or going to war. They chose war; at least, some of them did, and the rest have had to go along. As for the involvement of the CIA and State Department, it is hard to be sure, but I believe that the Ukrainian nationalists appealed to us for help, much more than us pressing them to fight a proxy war for us. As I said, it's complicated, and I know our hands aren't completely clean, but I do not accept the narrative that the war was entirely or even primarily caused by the CIA and NATO. This dispute between the Russian and Ukrainian peoples is older than the United States.
You really need to do more research on the CIA, and the push for global hegemony, both economic and military, by the monied interests of the West, particularly the U.S., and to a lesser extent, Britain.
By the way, the Ukrainian Nazi nationalists appealed to us for help, after we told them we’d support their attempt to coup a democratically elected government. Fify.
I think you make some excellent points. Number 1: we don't know.
We do know, however, that under Trump Russia took no new territory (anywhere, I believe) and that we saw historic peace deals in the ME. We might wish to keep facts, rather than counter-factuals, first in our minds. The addition of RFK Jr. and Tulsi (both facts) are a good sign. Past actions are not guarantees of future outcomes, but I'd say we stick with evidence rather than counterfactuals. Just saying.
Thank you to bringing a nuanced approach to this complex issue. I have many points of disagreement with Sachs, but this space is too limited to deliberate. Let me just say that I find it arrogant to present Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet republics simply as US and West’s puppets. Though there is no denying the US influence and involvement, do not underestimate the cultural factors and the complicated history of relationship between these ethnic entities. Saying that the US refusal to provide financial support to post-Soviet Russia is the only reason for the current crisis is oversimplification. There may be diplomatic errors made by the West, which aggravated the confrontation, but Russia follows its own path. Do not apply western logic and norms to its politics. We really need a brilliant politician in the WH to dissolve the hostilities and avoid WWIII. Russia is is a state close to 1930s Germany, and the danger to the world’s peace is real. Alas, I know of no great diplomats or strategists to deal with this danger.
I am glad you are having good time at my expense. But I am convinced that Russia is solely responsible for what it has become. It is arrogant for Americans to think they may snap their fingers and easily turn Russia or Ukraine into one of the states or a member of EU. As my granddaughter says, not gonna happen.
To answer you seriously, an example of diplomatic errors is sanctions. It was clear from day one that they did not work. They hurt super- wealthy oligarchs, some of which were Putin’s enemies or contributed to international charities. The Russian middle class and well off were annoyed and frustrated because they could no longer ski in France and Switzerland and buy luxury European goods. it hurt European economy more than Russian. The Russians turn to domestic ski resorts and spas, which they discovered were as good, and it profited Russian economy. Then they restructured the economy and developed industries non-existent before to compensate for lack of imports. It resulted in well-rounded thriving economy. But the western countries continues to add names to the sanctions list.
I too served as a Cold War analyst (85-89) and Jeffery Sachs is a kindred spirit. Being in the same room with warlords was a lesson in militarism. I was afraid of Armageddon then and I am afraid of it now.
Of all the animals in Mother Nature, man is the only species that wantonly destroys himself, his families, neighbors, communities, and his environment. He is also the only animal that measures his worth in terms of money and power. We, all of us, pay a price for this.
This, but not totally. There is generosity, empathy, selflessness. The problem is in our shallow celebrity society value is based on --- celebrity. And it is disgusting.
Christendom is/was the root of those kinder impulses. Alas, we are in a post Christian age. And yet, and yet, there are those who still bear the mark of the Savior, not perfectly, but . . .
“In 1990, Poland’s GDP per capita (measured in purchasing-power terms) was XX% of neighboring Germany. By 2020, it had reached YY% of Germany’s GDP per capita, following decades of rapid economic growth.”
HAHAHAHA I rushed in here hoping to be the first to nail this one. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done the same thing saying to myself “Just write it now; you can fill the numbers in later.” More than once in a ****ing peer-reviewed article!
I do this all the time in technical drawings when, for example, a particular model of a component is not specified. These are the only items in my drawings that are red and so are easily identifiable.
Clinton loved drunkard Yeltsin whom he could control; Gorbachev was embarrassed as a self professed sophisticated man when the US lied about NATO expansion eastward and didn’t get it as a written document. But as Sachs says, the US pisses on agreements and treaties regardless.
This perhaps the most ignorant and ill-informed comment posted on this site. I can only assume this an AI-generated bot, or a troll. The three praying hands symbolizing peace, I suppose, is the icing on the dumb-ass cake.
We'll take that as your concession there's no case to be made case for our "DC elites" who've gotten fat and rich at our expense. What I propose is probably too easy on them.
Americans are the most manipulated, propagandized, fleeced, used and abused people on the planet.
My first vote was for JFK, and I voted Dem ever since despite my lying eyes. I am horrified to now see that the lesser of evils is Trump and the batshit crazy GOP. They took our heroes when they killed JFK, RFK, MLK, and they left us with that POS Barack Obama. Revenge is sweet and a giant fuck you to all the neocons and globalists. I will vote for Trump in 2024 even if he’s in jail, removed from all the ballots, or dead.
Jeffrey Sachs is one of our living national treasures. The story of our missed opportunities to build positive relationships with Russia post Soviet Union and to help the Russian people remains a truly tragic one. The narrow straight jacket of neoconservative thought has cost the world incalculable amounts. I am convinced that, if Sach’s recommendations had been taken up, we’d be in an entirely different place now with both Russia and China. Instead of working together to build a better world, we mindlessly and pointessly poke the bear and inflame the dragon. What missed opportunities!
It’s absolutely astonishing how often these days I read articles or interviews where people say such things as: “In 1989 when I was advisor to the Polish government,” or “When I was advisor to Yeltsin…” (both Mr. Sachs), or “When I was briefing President Kennedy…”(Ray McGovern), “When I exposed Mei Lai…” (Seymour Hersh),
Or even, “When I played basketball for Outer Mongolia…” (Taibbi), or, “When I was chief arms inspector in Iraq…”, (Ritter). The point is that none of these essential minds are available to readers of the TimesPostCNNo’sphere. No wonder those people are clueless. They’re left with Krugman abusing himself with his Nobel Prize.
To all of the people who were really there, took chances, made sacrifices, did good, hard, work, and just, fucking, mattered.
Thanks to all of you, and thank the Gods that there’s a home for your words still, sparse though the crowd may be, (for now).
Well said, well said. It is professionally unforgivable that the high-status media did not send their best journalists to exactly these persons, in the thick of the events they analyse, with their insider knowledge, and did not open their pages to them. The NYT has slammed the door on Sachs. It has slammed the door on journalism. So journalism is not what it is about. It is an institution within a system, and it is a servant of the system. That system appears to be depend on US domination. Same for just about all the leading Western media (I live in Germany, and it is no different among the so-called status media here).
The USA is a ripe goose to be plundered. There is money to be made hand over fist and the US government is doling it out. Do we want it to go to Russians or our own oligarchs??
Oh great, now I'm thinking about autoeroticism involving old men and gold medals.
“Hoped for better, turned out as always.”
I don’t agree with Professor Sachs on everything, but he is over the target calling out the neocon warmongers. Like many other truth tellers, he has been black balled from MSM. Thanks for featuring him here. Hope he starts a Substack. Perhaps he can advise the Trump administration or even become Secretary of State…
"They sought and until today seek a unipolar world led by a hegemonic US, in which Russia and other nations will be subservient."
And looking back with the benefit of history, their failure has been nothing less than catastrophic. Failed wars of choice, collapsing infrastructure, rejection of the dollar standard, and the usurpation of U.S. global hegemony by the BRICS, led by China.
I saw Sen Ron Johnson, Chair of Homeland Sec and Govt Affairs Cmmte, say in an interview with Greenwald, that we had pursued the same strategy in every conflict since since Vietnam and it always failed to meet any objectives. He was quite good and I don't know why we're stuck with insane neocons
The reason we are stuck with the insane neocons is because they never suffer the consequences for their messes and failures, that, and that they are backed by the CMIC whose shares are owned by both neocons and neoliberals.
Pride goeth before the fall.
"Entropy requires no maintenance."
Which is to say that my guess is that the motivation for initiating the policy was mostly laziness, of the sort associated with triumphalism and dominant power. Like, here comes Victor Capitalism. Let the Defeated sort their condition out for themselves, it's easier that way. For the Victorious, at least. In the short run.
Yeah, the BRICS are going nowhere, but I do understand their desire to stick it to the US. They just won't be the instrument to do it.
I think that's a bit premature, there is still some sorting out to be done but I wouldn't count it out.
Some of Sachs’ liberal views don’t appeal to me, but isn’t his honesty refreshing? Honesty is now our most valued commodity since it’s been suppressed for too long.
Isn’t this why Matt, Walter, Dr Sachs, and Yuri have a loyal following?
Valued and scarce!
You can follow Jeffery Sachs on YouTube.
Also with Glenn Diesen, Neutrality Studies and The Duran among others.
he is a regular on Andrew Napolitano's podcast: Judging Freedom.
you can find it on youtube, but they are censoring assholes - so here is the rumble link to Napolitano's channel: https://rumble.com/c/JudgeNapolitanoFightingFreedom
Congressional report - How the Clinton Administration Exported Government Instead of Free Enterprise and Failed the Russian People
Russia's rampant capital flight, estimated at as much as $500 billion since Russian independence, is another serious consequence of corruption and organized crime. The culmination of the Clinton administration's fatally-flawed macroeconomic policy for Russia occurred in August 1998, when Russia's default on its debts and devaluation of the ruble led to the nation's total economic collapse. Millions of ordinary men and women who had deposited their money in Russian banks lost everything. ATM and debit cards ceased to work. Dozens of banks became insolvent and disappeared. Angry depositors besieged Russian banks, only to learn they had been wiped out. Millions of senior citizens, whose meager pension income had been suspended for months, were cut off completely. When the dust finally settled in March 1999, the ruble--and with it, every Russian's life savings—had lost fully 75% of its value.
https://irp.fas.org/congress/2000_rpt/russias-road.pdf
This suggests that what Putin said (he wanted to ally with the US and west) in his interview with Tucker was true.
He proposed to Clinton that Russia join NATO! Clinton was intrigued at first, but the real powers promptly squashed that idea.
We know that Hillary is a neocon's neocon. There is a special fire in Hades for Albright
And what purpose would that serve? Intriguing and cute, certainly, but they could as well dismantle NATO. Was’t the idea of NATO to defend the West from a potential threat from the socialist block?
The front for NATO was defence but NATO has NEVER legally fought a defensive war, even when the wars were legally permitted, they were based on lies making those wars illegal.
NATO certainly could have used the help in Afghanistan.
Do you realize that the US practically fought against the Soviet Army after they invaded the Afghanistan? The US supported and armed Taliban as their proxy against the USSR.
Clinton was smart enough not to cross the 6 ways from Sunday crowd that everyone with sense in Washington fears.
Actually it was a dozen ways. Schumer to Trump
Hell, Russia still would, if they could.
The West does not seek allies but vassals.
Nah, I don't think so, Russia has been lied to and screwed over so many times there's zero trust left, Putin has sad as much and now he has the rest of the world at his back, admittedly to varying degrees..
I hope you are right, but Russian eagerness to enter any kind of deal indicates otherwise.
I was thinking the same thing.
Too bad Putin violated the Minsk Agreement and invaded Ukraine. He views treaties as tools to control others but not binding on him. "Nov 2, 2023 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin on Thursday signed a law withdrawing Russia's ratification of the global treaty banning nuclear weapons tests, a step condemned by the organisation which promotes adherence to the landmark arms control pact."
Odd, as Ukraine promptly broke the Minsk Accord, and had fullilled precisely none of its ob obligations under Minsk-2, which Poroshenko, holladne and Merkel all admitted was always a sham intended to buy Ukraine time.
Odd. Then why did Putin feel a need to announce the end of Minsk 2 two days before invading? "Russia went on to officially recognise the self-proclaimed Luhansk and Donetsk people's republics on 21 February 2022.[9] Following that decision, on 22 February 2022, President Putin said that the Minsk agreements "no longer existed", and that Ukraine, not Russia, was to blame for their collapse, accusing Ukraine of genocide in Donbas in his comments[97][98][10] – a statement largely seen as baseless and factually wrong by the wider world, academics studying genocide, and the United Nations.[99][100][101][102] Russia then invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022.[
"Odd. Then why did Putin feel a need to announce the end of Minsk 2 two days before invading?"
Because Ukraine wasn't keeping its end of the deaL, and never intended to.
Is this projection?
Yes-yes, it is.
Yes, it's a news reel projection looking for a screen.
I think I already saw it on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, NPR etc.
Minsk had already been violated by Ukraine.
Minsk 1 didn't work. Russia kept sending in more troops and Ukraine resisted.
I believe the U.S., too, has withdrawn from treaties that no longer suited its purposes. This is not to say that Putin is in the right, only that there is nothing exceptional about a sovereign nation leaving a treaty.
Believing something without referencing examples from reality asks me to engage in faith-based discussion. I'm not into faith-based anything.
I don't love Jeffrey Sachs, but he makes a compelling case that our policy towards Russia was created and implemented by complete fucktards in a series of Administrations, both Republican and Democrat. The mess we now have on our hands is entirely the fault of these self-dealing neo-com imbeciles. Victoria Nuland - I'm looking at you.
I read the comment that goes like yours, I don't love Sachs, or something of the kind, and why is that? I don't need anyone to tell me Russia bad since I grew up hearing that from my teachers and everyone else. I'm glad I never had such black and white thinking about things, even as a kid which the US depends on from it's people in it's vilification of Russia, all facts to contrary. In psychology such thinking is considered, well, sick. Your right about those neocons and they are in bed with the democratic party. They shifted from the republican party to the democrats and find themselves in love.
Did they ever…Liz Chaney endorsed Kamala Harris today. The NPR crowd can finally come out of the closet.
Russia is not bad. But the communists were pure evil. And Putin has become a corrupt autocrat. Problem is our neocons, State Dept clowns and CIA dipsticks are equally despotic and foul.
Well, do you see them as pure evil when you think about the fact we would have lost WWII without them?
The Russian people were forced to make that sacrifice. As Stalin and his commisars sat warm and well fed, far away from the front. What planet do you live on?
Did you read the list of US debacles around the entire globe?? No one is equal to that!!
Russia used to be bad because it was communist
As I said to someone else who had the same slant on Russia do you at least appreciate the fact that with their profound loss of life and sacrifices during WWII they won that war for the world, and Nazi Germany did not?
I think in recent ti.es we were far better off cooperating in fighting ISIS together, like we fought the Nazis together
My public education didn’t teach me to hate Russia. Its focus was Hitler and Germany. It would have been good had I learned not hate, but at least some of the facts about the outcomes of Communism.
It is frequently true that it is the government, the elite who are responsible for evil and not the common person. Radical Islam infesting certain countries is an exception.
This country has repeatedly told people to hate, to mistrust Russia, It did so in it's many drills that kids diving under their desks, pulling down window shades to protect children to blinding light of a nuclear attack or had them standing in the hall during one of those drills. They turned Russia into the boogie man for children. With adults they spewed their hate through the TV or the radio. All this during a period when we were rampaging through South America, a Korean war and one in one in Vietnam. Not to mention our assistance in Indonesia's communist purge that killed almost a million people. Who am I afraid of, well, I'm afraid of US.
Thanks for the reply. You cover a lot of the ground in your response. The diving under desks was before my time. The Korean and Vietnam wars? Communism was a real threat and its current western variant is as well.
Do i think all we’ve done “just”? No.
As a citizen am I required to do what I can to make things better here? Yes.
I am not afraid of the typical American, “US”. I am afraid of the oligarchs and of those of our “elite” who are largely brainwashed, stupid, evil, or some mix of the three.
Seemed a bit self-serving. He did at least back stuff up with things he wrote at the time but a few mea culpas might make me doubt his sincerity less.
hint: there is never an easy fix and there are a lot more variables in the equation than any economist ever accounts for
The whole piece is kind of a mea culpa, isn't it? He's admitting that he didn't recognise at the time what was really going on.
Possibly but I read it as "the Cold Warriors screwed up my perfect solution." I guess the mea culpa is he lost out to them. I tend to agree with the pieces he cited that he wrote but there is a lack of humility that I find self-serving.
Using Ukrainian lives in our proxy war against Russia, and knowing full well there will be hundreds and hundreds of the thousand that are dead as a result to me is no different then a genocide. No wonder the US has no conscience in supplying weapons to Israel to carry out a genocide of it's own.
It freaking kills me to see older people in the circles I frequent, people who were in vocal in the day opposing the Vietnam war, sporting blue and yellow stickers on the back of their cars like some badge of honor. I just want to shake them and yell, " I guess the MIC is just dandy if you aren't being drafted for it then you hypocrite!"
Most people you talk to on this issue, have been raised to hate, or mistrust Russia, and it remains a given for the rest of their lives, a religion of sorts. So if the US lies as to it's reasons for this proxy war and Zelensky cries and bemoans what is happening, well of course it's all Russia's fault, since they are and always have been the enemy, except in WWII,
I can see that. I also think it's because they don't have skin in the game. A traditionally vilified Boogeyman that one doesn't actually have to face certainly seems to give license to some to abstract and devalue other's lives.
on edit: Yeah, they were our WWII allies, but I remember hearing armchair generals in my childhood opining that Patton should have just pressed through to Moscow...
They are also their own proxies. The Ukrainians don't want to be ruled (again) by Russia. Whether we are self-interested in helping them is not relevant to the fact that Ukrainians prefer self-government.
Yeah good for them, however when the US helps implement a coup whose purpose was to use Ukraine to bring down Russia that's quite a different story. We've used them and hundreds of thousands of lives have been destroyed, a country has been destroyed. I don't blame Russia, but do blame the US. When Biden came back from his trip to Ukraine his senility certainly let the cat out of the bag when he said Putin has got to go, and really that's what it is all about. When we can help Israel implement a genocide, killing thousands upon thousands of children, kill their parents, their families, and put them as risk for communicable diseases and watch them go hungry, as Israel also cuts off their food supply, well, you know we're just no good. When our representatives can give Netanyahu a standing ovation you know we are bastards! By the way I don't want to negate the mothers and fathers they kill turning children into orphans. Also the death toll is no doubt three or four times higher since most of the dead, especially children rot under the rubble.
SOME Ukrainians don’t want to be ruled by Russia, primarily the ones in the western half that used to be part of the Austrian Empire. But many of those in the eastern half, which was part of Russia for hundreds of years, not only want to be ruled by Russia but speak Russian, not Ukrainian, as their first language and identify as Russian rather than Ukrainian. It had been a divided country ever since it began its existence as an independent nation-state in 1991, which is why its neutrality between Russia and the West was written into its constitution—until, of course, the CIA-sponsored 2014 coup d’état that overthrew the democratically elected president that was trying to maintain its neutrality, which is when the war started.
Speaking Russian does not equate to wanting to be ruled by Russia. Yanukovych was not neutral. He was a Russian puppet who fled to Russia. "In November 2013, a wave of large-scale protests known as "Euromaidan" began in response to President Yanukovych's decision not to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the European Union (EU), instead choosing closer ties to Russia. Euromaidan soon developed into the largest democratic mass movement in Europe since 1989."
The narrative that the CIA made Ukrainians want to trade with the EU and not be under Russia's heed is standard Putin propaganda. Sadly, many men in eastern Ukraine were pressed into service to die for the Russian invasion.
Isn't Zelensky a U.S. puppet who's constantly on The Grand Tour throughout the west?
That’s bullshit. Yanukovych was hardly a puppet. He was trying to maintain Ukraine’s traditional neutrality in the face of the USA pushing to get it to join NATO and the EU pushing it to join the EU, both of which posed obvious threats to Russia. He fled to Russia after he was overthrown by the CIA-backed coup because where else would he go? That’s when the war started because many of those in the eastern part of Ukraine, especially those whose first language is Russian, many of whom identify as Russian, didn’t want to be ruled by a Western-backed puppet government who were attacking the linguistic, political and cultural rights of Russian-speakers.
This isn’t Putin propaganda; it’s the truth, as Jeffrey Sachs, who knows more about the region than pretty much anyone else in the West, points out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWYZpF2ngnc
All Ukraine would have had to do is to have upheld Minsk-2.
Putin planned the invasion for years, building up a war chest. He had no intention of leaving Ukraine alone. He wanted a second bite of the apple. His miscalculation was that the West would ignore it again. Ooops. Now Putin is mired in sanctions, destroyed refineries, and losing troops and equipment in huge numbers. Of course, that could turn around if Ukraine doesn't continue to receive aid.
Perhaps you can provide evidence for this, especially as the Ukrainian military was collapsing after Ukraine broke the origina Minsk Accord, It was Ukraine, not Russia, which begged for Minsk-2, which Poroshenko, Merkel and Hollande all agreed was a sham that Ukraine never intended to fulfill.
Hubris. Even after Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, our betters think they can do no wrong
That flips our narrative on its head. It leaves me wondering at this point, "Are we the baddies?"
Yes, and have been since ‘45. We lost our minds over Russia in 1918, but the hegemonic delusion really kicked into overdrive after WWII. We broke bread with Nazis to help us subvert all things Russia, and that started before the war ended in Europe. We are the evil empire, much as it pains me to say it.
Ignoring the fact that in 1917, "Russia" became an ethnic society within a Bolshevik totalitarian state ensures a one-sided and skewed view of history. Read Anthony Beavor's history of the Spanish Civil war, or any neutral study of soviet expansionism from 1917 on. International communism is and was a thing. The current Russian government, born out of the second Russian revolution, of 1989-1994, is a more or less "new" form of government never seen before during the Soviet period, or under the tsars.
The history of democratic traditions in Europe is worth studying. Polond, Romania, and almost all eastern European nations have almost no democratic tradition prior to the 1990s. Even in western Europe, the history of democracy is very short. Empire colonialism was practiced by Holland, Portugal, Spain, France, and Great Britain post-1945. Witness Dutch attempts post liberation from the Nazis to reimpose colonial authority over Indonesia and the resulting wars, or the French in Viet Nam. The former Soviet Union and the Chinese communist state funded and assisted nationalist/communist insurgencies across the globe.
We have managed to place ourselves on the threshold of nuclear conflagration at a point in history where there is less starvation, lack of potable water, or people dying from conflicts than at any point in modern history. Good for us!
If you don’t think we’re practicing empire colonialism, you’re naive, or propagandized, or both. From countless wars, coups, terrorism via our support for right-wing dictators, undermining countless third world countries via sanctions or World Bank/IMF blackmail, we’ve caused far more death, misery, and destruction than all the communist insurgencies combined, and it ain’t close.
Read The Jakarta Method, read The Devils’s Chessboard, read Overthrow. We gave the world MacDonalds and Coke and a corrupt capitalism that threatens our very existence as a species. Good for us? Comedy gold, that.
At no point did I dispute Sachs/Klein's contentions re: empire colonialism. I've stated for years that the way to think of US foreign policy in the 2020s is that of the Ohio Company of Virginia looking west at a continent controlled by "savages" and competing European economic interests north, south, and west, only in the 2020's the riches are all east of Germany's borders. Sachs on US "full spectrum dominance" in every area of the globe is very clear on this topic.
What I am saying, contra you, is that we need to place all the relevant facts within an accurate historical context. You omit all references to the totalitarian anti-freedom priorities at the heart of international communism, policies explicitly stated by defenders of communism over decades.
What does that totalitarianism mean in practice? No Substack, no capitalism, no private property, zero free speech, no freedom to travel. Gulags, poverty, incivility, corruption, inequality, and state censorship and state terrorism against the citizenry on a scale you clearly cannot imagine. We'd already be in camps, or dead, not posting on Twitter. Fact.
Putin is credited by Russian defenders for being kinda/sorta capable of curtailing some of the power of the oligarch/gangsters who actually control much of Russia's modern economy.
All of us, all nations, are doing our 'best' within the systems we've inherited, not designed. Can we do better? We're finding that out as we speak. Already, the first half of the 2000s is off to a much better start than the 20th century. The world is a much, much, much better place than in was even 50 years ago. Which is why the current conflicts, domestic and abroad, are so indefensible.
This is exactly where Sachs lost me. In 1945, the USSR was the greatest threat to the world. Its open and active mission to spread international communism, which they executed to great effect, was at the center of all western foreign policy for 50 years. International Communism was responsible for the murder of over 100 million people. Suddenly, we have complete amnesia about all of this? Is the death toll simply too large to comprehend?
Allying with the Soviets to defeat the Nazis was a deal with the devil.
That said, I doubt the continuity of communist ideology between pre and post USSR Russia.
I don't think we are the baddies, exactly — I realize I'm a minority in this room — but it's fair to say that the situation is complicated and has a long history, and that we have passed up opportunities to improve it.
No one can say for sure what would have happened if Sachs's recommendations were followed. I agree with him that we should have tried, but Russian culture does not seem to be fertile ground for democracy, and culture is not something that can be changed easily. Yes, Germany and Japan after WWII went from militaristic to pacifistic, but look what that required: massive military defeat and occupation. I am not saying a Marshall Plan for Russia couldn't have worked, but its success was certainly not guaranteed.
But let's imagine that, although we didn't attempt Marshall Plan-scale economic stabilization of Russia, we did hold back on NATO expansion, as George Kennan recommended. What would have happened? Again, we can't be certain, but I think the argument that Russia and Ukraine would have resolved their differences peaceably is a difficult one to make. The Kremlin is full of warmongers too, and the Ukrainians, I think understandably, feel a considerable amount of anti-Russian sentiment after centuries of subjugation. This war was quite predictable, if not inevitable, and indeed was predicted by Russian politician Eduard Limonov in 1992. This is an emotional rant, not a dispassionate analysis, and I certainly don't endorse everything Limonov says, but it's worth watching anyway to get an idea of how Russians saw Ukraine's independence already in 1992: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoJoZD2I8us After pointing out that nationalist sentiment was likely to lead to war, he then indulges in it himself, by arguing that the Donbas and Crimea should be returned to Russia.
I could go into more depth, but the short version is that I think the Ukrainians have known, probably since 1991 but certainly since 2006, that they would be faced with a choice between becoming a puppet state of Russia, like Belarus, or going to war. They chose war; at least, some of them did, and the rest have had to go along. As for the involvement of the CIA and State Department, it is hard to be sure, but I believe that the Ukrainian nationalists appealed to us for help, much more than us pressing them to fight a proxy war for us. As I said, it's complicated, and I know our hands aren't completely clean, but I do not accept the narrative that the war was entirely or even primarily caused by the CIA and NATO. This dispute between the Russian and Ukrainian peoples is older than the United States.
You really need to do more research on the CIA, and the push for global hegemony, both economic and military, by the monied interests of the West, particularly the U.S., and to a lesser extent, Britain.
By the way, the Ukrainian Nazi nationalists appealed to us for help, after we told them we’d support their attempt to coup a democratically elected government. Fify.
I think you make some excellent points. Number 1: we don't know.
We do know, however, that under Trump Russia took no new territory (anywhere, I believe) and that we saw historic peace deals in the ME. We might wish to keep facts, rather than counter-factuals, first in our minds. The addition of RFK Jr. and Tulsi (both facts) are a good sign. Past actions are not guarantees of future outcomes, but I'd say we stick with evidence rather than counterfactuals. Just saying.
Thank you to bringing a nuanced approach to this complex issue. I have many points of disagreement with Sachs, but this space is too limited to deliberate. Let me just say that I find it arrogant to present Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet republics simply as US and West’s puppets. Though there is no denying the US influence and involvement, do not underestimate the cultural factors and the complicated history of relationship between these ethnic entities. Saying that the US refusal to provide financial support to post-Soviet Russia is the only reason for the current crisis is oversimplification. There may be diplomatic errors made by the West, which aggravated the confrontation, but Russia follows its own path. Do not apply western logic and norms to its politics. We really need a brilliant politician in the WH to dissolve the hostilities and avoid WWIII. Russia is is a state close to 1930s Germany, and the danger to the world’s peace is real. Alas, I know of no great diplomats or strategists to deal with this danger.
‘There may be diplomatic errors made by the West…’
Now that, was hilarious.
I am glad you are having good time at my expense. But I am convinced that Russia is solely responsible for what it has become. It is arrogant for Americans to think they may snap their fingers and easily turn Russia or Ukraine into one of the states or a member of EU. As my granddaughter says, not gonna happen.
To answer you seriously, an example of diplomatic errors is sanctions. It was clear from day one that they did not work. They hurt super- wealthy oligarchs, some of which were Putin’s enemies or contributed to international charities. The Russian middle class and well off were annoyed and frustrated because they could no longer ski in France and Switzerland and buy luxury European goods. it hurt European economy more than Russian. The Russians turn to domestic ski resorts and spas, which they discovered were as good, and it profited Russian economy. Then they restructured the economy and developed industries non-existent before to compensate for lack of imports. It resulted in well-rounded thriving economy. But the western countries continues to add names to the sanctions list.
I too served as a Cold War analyst (85-89) and Jeffery Sachs is a kindred spirit. Being in the same room with warlords was a lesson in militarism. I was afraid of Armageddon then and I am afraid of it now.
Shows how deep the Deep State is and what a pack of sh*ts they all are.
Of all the animals in Mother Nature, man is the only species that wantonly destroys himself, his families, neighbors, communities, and his environment. He is also the only animal that measures his worth in terms of money and power. We, all of us, pay a price for this.
This, but not totally. There is generosity, empathy, selflessness. The problem is in our shallow celebrity society value is based on --- celebrity. And it is disgusting.
Christendom is/was the root of those kinder impulses. Alas, we are in a post Christian age. And yet, and yet, there are those who still bear the mark of the Savior, not perfectly, but . . .
Made in the image of God, but with Original Sin.
From the article:
“In 1990, Poland’s GDP per capita (measured in purchasing-power terms) was XX% of neighboring Germany. By 2020, it had reached YY% of Germany’s GDP per capita, following decades of rapid economic growth.”
What ate the values for XX & YY?
HAHAHAHA I rushed in here hoping to be the first to nail this one. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done the same thing saying to myself “Just write it now; you can fill the numbers in later.” More than once in a ****ing peer-reviewed article!
I do this all the time in technical drawings when, for example, a particular model of a component is not specified. These are the only items in my drawings that are red and so are easily identifiable.
XX = female and YY = non-binary. We have finally solved the gender mystery! 🤣
ZZ Top
In the video he said 1/3 and 70%; i.e xx=1/3 and yy=70
Clinton loved drunkard Yeltsin whom he could control; Gorbachev was embarrassed as a self professed sophisticated man when the US lied about NATO expansion eastward and didn’t get it as a written document. But as Sachs says, the US pisses on agreements and treaties regardless.
If Russia nuked DC, we would wake-up the next morning a better and stronger country.
Same if anyone used a chemical weapon on it.
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
This perhaps the most ignorant and ill-informed comment posted on this site. I can only assume this an AI-generated bot, or a troll. The three praying hands symbolizing peace, I suppose, is the icing on the dumb-ass cake.
Please. No one could ever steal that designation from you. 😂
The prayer hands symbolize prayer, dimwit. This time, we all pray you live in DC. 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
And I pray it's the chemical weapon. I want y'all to suffer a quite a bit. 😂🙏🏻😂🙏🏻
Thank you sincerely for making your position clear to all. Have a better one!
No, thank you for helping me make it clear.
The Dim and Deep Stater are more our enemies than the Russians, Chinese and Muzz. You're the real enemy we need to exterminate.
I pray for the day that the sell-by date on Cheap Shot Internet Rhetoric expires.
Cheap shot, huh?
Here are the major policies advanced by our "DC elites" for the last 50 years:
- free trade and trade with China which shipped 25 million American manufacturing jobs abroad
- endless immigration, which depresses wages and fills our country with criminals
- a failed education system at all three levels
- bad treaties that see us spend to defend Europe while Europeans build good schools and roads with the savings
But please ... make the case that DC's obliteration is bad. I doubt you can. 😂
Seeing as you've proposed a remedy of mass murder and extermination, you've proved to not be worth the time.
Your hype is as stale as a "laughing 'til I cry" emoji.
We'll take that as your concession there's no case to be made case for our "DC elites" who've gotten fat and rich at our expense. What I propose is probably too easy on them.
But thanks for playing. 😂😂
Americans are the most manipulated, propagandized, fleeced, used and abused people on the planet.
My first vote was for JFK, and I voted Dem ever since despite my lying eyes. I am horrified to now see that the lesser of evils is Trump and the batshit crazy GOP. They took our heroes when they killed JFK, RFK, MLK, and they left us with that POS Barack Obama. Revenge is sweet and a giant fuck you to all the neocons and globalists. I will vote for Trump in 2024 even if he’s in jail, removed from all the ballots, or dead.
me too
Question for Jeffrey Sachs, is there any problem for which spending truckloads of U.S. taxpayer dollars (current and borrowed) is not your answer?
Jeffrey Sachs is one of our living national treasures. The story of our missed opportunities to build positive relationships with Russia post Soviet Union and to help the Russian people remains a truly tragic one. The narrow straight jacket of neoconservative thought has cost the world incalculable amounts. I am convinced that, if Sach’s recommendations had been taken up, we’d be in an entirely different place now with both Russia and China. Instead of working together to build a better world, we mindlessly and pointessly poke the bear and inflame the dragon. What missed opportunities!
BINGO!