Political Posts

[whiskybravo]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

It is idiotic to assume that every Russian speaking person want to live in Russia. Most speak Russian and  Ukrainian  anyways.

Straw man!

I didn’t assume all Russian-speaking people want to live in Russia. I was asking whether, from a geopolitical or pragmatic standpoint, it’s unreasonable to consider Russian governance in areas with a strong Russian cultural or linguistic identity — especially in the context of ending a war.

[whiskybravo]

40 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

For example, the Italian voting.  Its likely true.  Theres anecdotes that support it.  But is there accurate data?  Not that I've seen. Which is why I asked for a source. 

I gave you two studies that supported my position.  You admit it likely true.  This is classic deflection.  You had your ego bruised when i rebutted your unsupported and incorrect statement that Ed Koch was a radical.  You yourself didn’t provide data to support.  That is hypocritical.

[dwy000]

50 minutes ago, whiskybravo said:

I gave you two studies that supported my position.  You admit it likely true.  This is classic deflection.  You had your ego bruised when i rebutted your unsupported and incorrect statement that Ed Koch was a radical.  You yourself didn’t provide data to support.  That is hypocritical.

This is what we are talking about. You gave a survey from a year before the election.  It wasnt even vs Harris.  And then some voting data from a couple areas of NY that have Italian populations. That doesnt show that Italians voted for Trump by a large margin.  Its anecdotal at best and wrong at worst.  I certainly believe its plausible they voted for Trump.  But if someone gave me a study showing the opposite I wouldnt be surprised either. Its exactly why I was hoping for real data and evidence. Because I cant find any and you didnt provide any. So to take it as fact is not correct. 

Edited August 18, 2025 by dwy000

[LC]

1 hour ago, whiskybravo said:

Straw man!

I didn’t assume all Russian-speaking people want to live in Russia. I was asking whether, from a geopolitical or pragmatic standpoint, it’s unreasonable to consider Russian governance in areas with a strong Russian cultural or linguistic identity — especially in the context of ending a war.

 

First let's give Gaza to Palestine. After all there is such a strong cultural and linguistic identity. And it would end the war. 

 

Might as well give them all of Israel. Culturally they're very similar, you know. 

 

Then we can discuss Ukraine. Sounds very reasonable!

Edited August 18, 2025 by LC

[cwericb]

21 minutes ago, LC said:

 

First let's give Gaza to Palestine. After all there is such a strong cultural and linguistic identity. And it would end the war. 

 

Might as well give them all of Israel. Culturally they're very similar, you know. 

 

Then we can discuss Ukraine. Sounds very reasonable!

 

Sounds like a good idea. And while we are at it, considering the high percentage of Hispanics in the Southwestern States and their linguistic and cultural ties to Mexico, giving those states back to Mexico would probably resolve all those border problems.  

[whiskybravo]

10 hours ago, dwy000 said:

This is what we are talking about. You gave a survey from a year before the election.  It wasnt even vs Harris.  And then some voting data from a couple areas of NY that have Italian populations. That doesnt show that Italians voted for Trump by a large margin.  It’s anecdotal at best and wrong at worst.  I certainly believe it’s plausible they voted for Trump.  But if someone gave me a study showing the opposite I wouldnt be surprised either. It’s exactly why I was hoping for real data and evidence. Because I cant find any and you didnt provide any. So to take it as fact is not correct. 

You’re being pedantic.  I  think it’s safe to say any reasonable person is comfortable with the following:  “A majority of Italian Americans favor Trump”.   There aren’t studies to reference for everything under consideration.
 

You don’t hold yourself to the same standards.  Since you incorrectly stated that Ed Koch was a radical, shouldn’t I take anything you say going forward with a grain of salt?

Edited August 18, 2025 by whiskybravo

[whiskybravo]

5 hours ago, LC said:

 

First let's give Gaza to Palestine. After all there is such a strong cultural and linguistic identity. And it would end the war. 

 

Might as well give them all of Israel. Culturally they're very similar, you know. 

 

Then we can discuss Ukraine. Sounds very reasonable!

Ah the snark.  Wouldn’t calm discourse be nicer. You know without condescension.
 

If you asked me twenty years ago should portions of the Donbas be given back to Russia.  I would have said what the hell for.  Even today I say it sucks that that may be a possibility as a result of Russian aggression.

All I am suggesting is that maybe it would be worth the cost to end the war.

 

In the real world Hamas’ actions have hurt their chances to lead a sovereign Palestine.  Going back to British mandate, the Arab position was Jews living under Arab sovereignty.  Hamas still maintains this view.  Viewed from the mandate era if you’re being honest how do you think that would have worked out for the Jews?  And looked at Today, what do you think of Hamas’ chances for success?  

 

 

Edited August 18, 2025 by whiskybravo

[John Hjorth]

1 hour ago, whiskybravo said:

... If you asked me twenty years ago should portions of the Donbas be given back to Russia.  I would have said what the hell for.  Even today I say it sucks that that may be a possibility as a result of Russian aggression. All I am suggesting is that maybe it would be worth the cost to end the war. ...

 

You appear mentally locked on, that an agreement with Russia about Ukraine will create permanent peace. On this side of the Atlantic pond it is gradually becomming the prevailing sentiment and judgement, that this assumption is unrealistic, unsustainable and perhaps even naive, because Putin and Russia can't be trusted.

 

The Urainian people has almost lost any trust and developed PTSD, on :

 

Wikipedia : Budapest Memorandum - and the Ukrianian people just experienced the US President and the Russian meeting in Alaska  'to fix 'the Ukrainian situation'' for them.

Edited August 18, 2025 by John Hjorth

[nsx5200]

13 hours ago, Cigarbutt said:

Time is a limited resource but the above exchanges (and most of this thread) meet the threshold for limited participation in this discussion (opinion).

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-025-02136-2#:~:text=These economic and social upheavals,Table 3 for illustrative examples).

Really insightful article with a very high signal to noise ratio, and if the results are accurate, provides another highly predictive tool in the mental toolbox.

 

Just curious how you came across this article.  Natural articles tends to be fairly technical and only intersect with mass media occasionally.  Unless you are/were a researcher, it's not something that a typical layperson would pick up and read for fun.  I probably should add it to a weekly skim list, but would appreciate if you can share other venues that provide similarly high quality summaries/results.

[whiskybravo]

1 hour ago, John Hjorth said:

 

You appear mentally locked on, that an agreement with Russia about Ukraine will create permanent peace. On this side of the Atlantic pond it is gradually becomming the prevailing sentiment and judgement, that this assumption is unrealistic, unsustainable and perhaps even naive, because Putin and Russia can't be trusted.

 

The Urainian people has almost lost any trust and developed PTSD, on :

 

Wikipedia : Budapest Memorandum - and the Ukrianian people just experienced the US President and the Russian meeting in Alaska  'to fix 'the Ukrainian situation'' for them.

John, I am locked on nothing.  I have no illusions that signing an agreement with Putin will create permanent peace.  You informed me that you Danes saw your border move a bit south in the wake of Germany’s WWI defeat.  Maybe realpolitik pushes Russia/Ukraine border a little West.  What does Brussels think is the solution?

[73 Reds]

22 hours ago, Cigarbutt said:

If one is into directionally correct thought processes, what is happening now with tariffs as an impediment to trade, is similar to what happened during covid (covid component of trade restrictions) without the excess associated money printing. This is starting to show up in goods inflation but (even with delayed effects through input costs) will also show up more and more on the 'services' side.

@73 Reds, is there any particular reason you stopped participating in this specific inflation//deflation sub-political discussion?

Traveling.  But you present some good data points. 

[John Hjorth]

4 hours ago, whiskybravo said:

John, I am locked on nothing.  I have no illusions that signing an agreement with Putin will create permanent peace.  You informed me that you Danes saw your border move a bit south in the wake of Germany’s WWI defeat.  Maybe realpolitik pushes Russia/Ukraine border a little West.  What does Brussels think is the solution?

 

@whiskybravo,

 

Thank you for your supplementary comments, those paired with the content of your original post now makes sense to me.

 

4 hours ago, whiskybravo said:

... What does Brussels think is the solution?

 

I think Brussels is thinking it's unsolvable in the short term, but is not expressing it at the moment.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Norway is a member of NATO, but not a member of EU [very rich, for obvious reasons Norway wont participate and contribute to the existing redistribution mess and madness going on inside EU, socialist style [i.e. related to agriculture]],

UK left EU in 2016, but is a material NATO member,

Turkey is a member of NATO, but not a member of EU,

Hungary is a member of NATO, and as well of EU, but have been blocking EU decisions against Russia in some cases lately,

USA's position as leading NATO member is a given, so European NATO members need find suiting face and attitude towards POTUS, to stay in good standing at POTUS, or NATO as institution gets frozen and crippled related to this situation, because this war is really an European issue, and for that reason a valid argument from both POTUS and from CofB&F members here ['this is not a war for the US, this is an European war' [about american money and budgets, and troops engaged in a war in Europe, etc.]

 

Thus, the unformal group of countries called 'the willings' -'the coalition of the countries willing to support Ukraine in the war against Russia' has gradually formed, as another celestial body appearing out of gravity inside some startdust.

 

Short term, for a period, these countries need support from USA, by USA trading arms etc. with those European countries, by those countries paying USA for those goods, to give them to Ukraine, for application in the war against Ukraine.

 

I personally really can't see any other way forward from here, but that is certainly not a sure thing. As an European citizen, thinking it through and phrasing it here, actually makes me feel very embarrassed. Peace dividend cashed in, and all that, based on trust in Putin. Absolutely naive.

 

So, it's imperative that POTUS, during the meetings later today in Washington, does not end up feeling insulted in any way, no matter what, or the whole thing goes into deadlock, causing the war just continues.

 

Let's see and hear what happens. I actually acknowledge POTUS giving it a try, while I still partly question POTUS' personal motive.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

So, It's quite complicated, actually.

 

- - - o 0 o - - - 

 

As a note, let me just mention Denmark holds the Presidency of the Council of the European Union [by now] the second half of 2025, represented by our prime minister Mette Frederiksen, but who is participating later today representing EU? Ursula Von der Leyen.

 

I'm personally sure Mette Frederiksen has tried to become member of the group going to Washington today. Equally sure I am, that she has been presented with the argument : 'Greenland' and 'nasty woman', remember?! - It's just a no-go, because you and POTUS are just to each other, what a red cloth is to a furious bull in some arena in Spain.'

Edited August 18, 2025 by John Hjorth

[LC]

6 hours ago, whiskybravo said:

Ah the snark.  Wouldn’t calm discourse be nicer. You know without condescension.

Your question is essentially “why don’t they just give Putin what he wants?”, with some silly justification about language and culture. 

Frankly, you asked a bad question that most people would just ignore. 
 

I felt in good faith that every question, no matter how disingenuously asked, deserves a response. No snark intended but the logic of your question is, to put nicely, total nonsense. 

[whiskybravo]

1 minute ago, LC said:

Your question is essentially “why don’t they just give Putin what he wants?”, with some silly justification about language and culture. 

Frankly, you asked a bad question that most people would just ignore. 
 

I felt in good faith that every question, no matter how disingenuously asked, deserves a response. No snark intended but the logic of your question is, to put nicely, total nonsense. 

Ignorant answer.  At some point military strength is going to dictate terms of peace.  Military strength will be dominated by energy resources.  Europe is in process of self immolating their energy patrimony at the green altar.  Russia on the other hand.  Wake up and smell the proverbial coffee lol

[changegonnacome]

 

 

22 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

I actually acknowledge POTUS giving it a try.

 

John can't help but feel that whats happening here (in Alaska last week & in DC today) is the final washing of the hands by Trump/the US around any further responsibility re:Ukraine & Russia.....the language from POTUS has switched from "I will have this conflict solved in no time at all" to "It's up to them now".......I think the penny dropped for Trump in Alaska......he who is in the ascendancy on the battlefield gets to dictate terms....the terms Putin has set are a very difficult pill to swallow for the Ukrainians and the Europeans....Trump knows they are unlikely to be able to agree to such terms (even though they should)......so for Trump there is no Nobel peace prize at the end of the rainbow in Kyiv ...........and so he's cutting and running as fast as he can....look at the zero mention now of enhanced US sanctions and severe consequences for Russia in 50, 12 or was it 10 days?!?!? The reason are there are no descent cards left to play for the US and the penny has dropped with Trump post-Alaska.

 

Why? Cause Trump I think now understands whats happening on the battlefield relative to Putin demands in Alaska......Ukraine is dangerously close to being overwhelmed by Russian forces and the manpower/artillery advantage that has characterized the war for two years now moves more in Russia's favor everyday ......if a deal is genuinely on the table for 20% land concession to Russia but with fulsome security guarantees moving forward they should take it ASAP.....the Europeans + Ukraine appear to be still delusional that some more optimal outcome is available at this point......every other outcome IMO is worse than the above......the US language at the end of today's DC summit will be instructive......I suspect it will amount to a more concrete of the above something like "over to YOU Ukraine and Europe to advance the framework Peace deal I secured in Alaska because we (the United States) have done what we can here". The last card Trump can and likely will play is that he will backstop EUROPEAN security guarantees...a kind of second derivative US security guarantee where France, Germany, Italy and the UK have to own the first tranche of said defense. 

 

Post-Alaska i think Trump has a better handle on things than the Europeans/Ukraine.....they should see his hand wringing as a sign to wrap this conflict up........the best exit for Ukraine was back in Istanbul in 2022, the next best exit is now IMO (if they can get a robust security guarantee that enshrines the 80% of Ukraine left that is)......if they dont take this exit (if the exit above actually exists which I'm still skeptical of) the Ukranians and Europeans are in for embarrassing defeat on the battlefield in 2026 where Trump will stand over them and say I told them to sign the deal I got for them in 2025 but they we're too dumb to take it.

[DooDiligence]

18 hours ago, Cigarbutt said:

Time is a limited resource but the above exchanges (and most of this thread) meet the threshold for limited participation in this discussion (opinion).

When making decisions, 'we' move in a spectrum between purely evidence-based 'information' and purely gut feeling-based 'information'.

It's interesting to note that the growing political polarization issue appears to be moving in tandem with a secular move in the spectrum towards intuition (away from factual analysis). This is actually supported by well done work (that tends to come from disconnected and well educated people who tend to rely more on the factual side of the spectrum:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-025-02136-2#:~:text=These economic and social upheavals,Table 3 for illustrative examples).

-----

TLDR summary:

The recent secular rise (to post Gilded-Age levels) in polarization and inequality that very recently accelerated has been associated with a move away from rational presentation of facts with reliable data to personal feel and intuition.

i thought it was interesting to note that what has been happening widely (including in the institutional Congress) in the US has also been happening in this (investment) Board.

A fascinating aspect is the growing distance from moderation makes it feel (intuition) like people are not even speaking the same language.

 

The public is largely unable to separate theatre from reality.

Facts are boring. Truth gets no respect. Profits over people.

 

• Media Influence and "Perpetual Campaign Style": The "impact of media on politicians," amplified by live coverage (e.g., C-SPAN from 1979), can drive politicians to "embrace a perpetual campaign style of representation, transforming congressional speeches into orchestrated performances aimed at capturing media attention." This may lead to "a reduced focus on meaningful intellectual discourse and nuanced policy discussions."

 

The people want drama. Keep it simple so they can understand it.

[LC]

41 minutes ago, whiskybravo said:

Ignorant answer.  At some point military strength is going to dictate terms of peace.  Military strength will be dominated by energy resources.  Europe is in process of self immolating their energy patrimony at the green altar.  Russia on the other hand.  Wake up and smell the proverbial coffee lol

 

I need to face reality?

Please, continue waxing on about culture and language as if that's some actual reason to forfeit sovereign borders to an aggressor.

 

If you want Ukraine to fold over when invaded then just say so.

 

Get your story together, currently you're reading as second-rate propaganda. You can do better, comrade!

Edited August 18, 2025 by LC

[dwy000]

8 hours ago, whiskybravo said:

You’re being pedantic.  I  think it’s safe to say any reasonable person is comfortable with the following:  “A majority of Italian Americans favor Trump”.   There aren’t studies to reference for everything under consideration.
 

You don’t hold yourself to the same standards.  Since you incorrectly stated that Ed Koch was a radical, shouldn’t I take anything you say going forward with a grain of salt?

First I never said Ed Koch was a radical, that was someone else. 

 

More importantly, your logic is flawed.  We cannot simply say a reasonable person is comfortable that a majority of Italians voted for Trump.  That is exactly the flaw of assumptions and why we look for data.  Just because something is plausible or even likely does not make it a fact.  

[whiskybravo]

17 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

First I never said Ed Koch was a radical, that was someone else. 

 

More importantly, your logic is flawed.  We cannot simply say a reasonable person is comfortable that a majority of Italians voted for Trump.  That is exactly the flaw of assumptions and why we look for data.  Just because something is plausible or even likely does not make it a fact.  

It was you. 

[whiskybravo]

42 minutes ago, LC said:

 

I need to face reality?

Please, continue waxing on about culture and language as if that's some actual reason to forfeit sovereign borders to an aggressor.

 

If you want Ukraine to fold over when invaded then just say so.

 

Get your story together, currently you're reading as second-rate propaganda. You can do better, comrade!

 

Ukraine currently faces a drastically reduced functional capacity due to ongoing conflict and infrastructure damage.

Therefore, in terms of available energy generation, Russia holds a significantly greater advantage both in installed and operating capacity.

 

Russia wins a war of attrition.  I don’t give a damn about Russia.  You’re the leftie  

 

[Cigarbutt]

14 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

Thats quite an interesting paper especially since it seems that the EMI score seems to predict future inequality. That would imply that inequality is bound to increase further.

Growing inequality is for real (supported quite strongly with facts).

See below, this has been a secular trend and is likely continuing to grow.

One question is: Is this good or bad?

One question is: Is there a level of inequality where non-linear changes could occur?

Based on the above paper (link between growing inequality and growing polarization (and resentment)), one could suggest that this trend is not constructively sustainable?

[Cigarbutt]

2 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

Traveling.  But you present some good data points. 

Happy and safe travels then. 

Over coffee this morning, with my significant other, we discussed trips in the coming months of September and January.

Itineraries do not, so far, include the US...

[LC]

12 minutes ago, whiskybravo said:

 

Ukraine currently faces a drastically reduced functional capacity due to ongoing conflict and infrastructure damage.

Therefore, in terms of available energy generation, Russia holds a significantly greater advantage both in installed and operating capacity.

 

Russia wins a war of attrition.  I don’t give a damn about Russia.  You’re the leftie  

 

 

Help me here - what does any of that have to do with culture and language?

[Cigarbutt]

1 hour ago, DooDiligence said:

 

The public is largely unable to separate theatre from reality.

Facts are boring. Truth gets no respect. Profits over people.

 

• Media Influence and "Perpetual Campaign Style": The "impact of media on politicians," amplified by live coverage (e.g., C-SPAN from 1979), can drive politicians to "embrace a perpetual campaign style of representation, transforming congressional speeches into orchestrated performances aimed at capturing media attention." This may lead to "a reduced focus on meaningful intellectual discourse and nuanced policy discussions."

 

The people want drama. Keep it simple so they can understand it.

Politics is a game, ok. But.

Opinion: Your country is not simply going through a cycle, it seems to have initiated a path leading to a slippery slope towards democratic backsliding. i still bet hugely on the US but this may be hard to reverse. My bet is that 'We, the people" will eventually figure it out. In the meantime, civility and humanity will be tested.   

[dwy000]

23 minutes ago, whiskybravo said:

It was you. 

Find it then. Another problem with assumptions. 

Edited August 18, 2025 by dwy000