I know this is a political post not about Ukraine, but as someone living in DC I can't resist laughing at these guys. Like y'all aren't going to slow DC traffic down, you're just gonna get stuck in it like everyone else.
Friedman is very much on target on the situation at this point. He says Putin has 4 choices at this point: he can lose early or lose late, he can lose small or lose big but basically he is going to lose and it's just a question of how he chooses to do that. He goes on to say that the situation is really dangerous for the world as a whole because the only way Putin can appear to win is with a permanent occupation of Ukraine, where he chooses not to accept that this is actually a loss. Friedman says the real danger in the situation is that the world has never lived with a big powerful pariah state in perpetuity. Just adding, I think his 4 choices are actually not that simple. Would Ukraine really choose not to pursue war crimes charges against Putin and reparations from Russia if Putin chose to lose small and early and just vacated tomorrow? I doubt it. Similarly, if Putin chose to really hammer all of Ukraine's cities and towns into the ground over the next year or two and then withdrew would Russia remain a pariah state in perpetuity? It's questionable. Really this looks more and more like Putin has gotten a grip on the tar baby and getting out of the brambles is going to be extremely hard for him. It's very possible that only another Russian leader can resolve this in a way that we're not locked into Bad Russia vs The West for the next generation. That's the scenario where Putin and Ukraine are locked together right up until the moment he drops dead of natural causes sometime in the next decade and then the next guy has to figure out how to unlock all of the contradictions Putin raised.
The clarification on this is that the US has not cleared transfers of American manufactured planes to Ukraine. The deal being offered is F-16's to countries that choose to transfer Migs to Ukraine's military. It's a very narrow distinction indeed.
Meh. I beat whoever Friedman is to the punch by posting this same thing a page ago. You can tell Friedman to suck it.
That's why he is going to fight this out. Putin has no sons, his daughters aren't involved in politics. He is old and has very little to lose. He needs to win here or the post soviet system he helped create in russia will collapse. I don't think it can sustain a loss. If he wanted reunification of the ussr, perhaps he should have started with belarus, he bank rolls their economy anyway
It’s even more wild how much you distorted what was said on the show “Media Buzz” because I was watching it as well. They just stated that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor six months after they were sanctioned and disallowed to buy oil. And that it’ll be interesting to see what happens with Russia when the sanctions really hit their economy. Not at all close to the spin you just put on it but ok.
Friedman is an economic columnist who was very influential 20-odd years ago. He was one of the guys telling the West not to expand NATO because this is the exact situation we'd find ourselves in, with a revanchist Russian leader striking out against the West. He was a "bring Russia into NATO before you bring the former Warsaw Pact in" kind of guy. He kind of fell out of favor at about the same time Putin took over. 1998: Prophetic. https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html 2008: A decade later and still he understood where we were headed. https://www.deseret.com/2008/8/23/2...pansion-fueled-today-s-russian-aggressiveness
I believe I accurately captured that segment. Did you watch the part where the media pundits started blaming media pundits? Lol
The show is called “MediaBuzz.” Howard Kurtz has made a career discussing how the media covers things for both liberal and conservative outlets. It’s the premise of the show, dude.
It's basically a ratings scheme...Even when they have the opportunity to be on-topic they have to say it's because of Biden or left-news shows. I like to think of it to how Skip Bayless cannot ever stop attacking LeBron James and make everything about Lebron even if he isn't involved. He does it because it helps keep audience engaged and it's turned into a gimmick. Like he and they probably feel they have to do this.
Zelensky's ex-boss... https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...-american-heartland-michel-kleptocracy-515948
It's important though to realize that the Western blunders that set the stage are still not remotely equal to Putin's blunder that makes 6-year old victims of thermobaric munitions a reality. Putin snapped at the wrong time and he has set Russia up for a horrific defeat that will simultaneously cause great pain everywhere else. This is true whether the fighting escalates or not, whether it leaves Ukraine's borders or not, whether nuclear weapons are ultimately deployed or not. Russia will lose early or lose late, they will lose small or lose big and in the process they will decide how much everybody else suffers in the process. It is not unreasonable to suggest that a long, costly defeat of Russia will see the crumbling of the country itself. There are Chechens who would rise very quickly once the cost of Russian involvement in Ukraine have made it hard for the Kremlin to do much about that.
