Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 309: Putin a lifetime bounty

(+) Yeah! (+)

I tried.

Anyway, no sanctions, no threats of war, nothing.

We literally shouldnt be in Afghanistan, if someone puts a bounty on our heads for being there...we could leave?

---

I mean it is possible to both leave Afghanistan and take diplomatic action against Putin. I don't think whether or not we should be in Afghanistan really matters in this case.
---

pyresword posted...

I mean it is possible to both leave Afghanistan and take diplomatic action against Putin. I don't think whether or not we should be in Afghanistan really matters in this case.

---

I didn't catch that the discussion last topic was about the bounties thing. Regarding that........ I'm not sure what a good response would have been. It's a difficult problem. If it's true that Russia did do this, it seems that our past overtures of peace and friendship have not generated as much goodwill from Russia as they had led us to believe. If Russia doesn't want to be friends, then I don't know that we should continue with the friendship policy.

---

Considering there wouldnt be bounties in Afghanistan on us if we werent there, I think it not only matters but is the cornerstone of the issue.


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Considering there wouldnt be bounties in Afghanistan on us if we werent there, I think it not only matters but is the cornerstone of the issue.

I'm not keen on troops being there either. Leaving and only leaving as a response to bounties is literally the worst option possible.
---

Okay, honest, probably stupid question: What does diplomatic action look like without warfare of some kind (including both economic via sanctions and cyber warfare)? What leverage does the US possibly have besides that? Russia got kicked out of the G8 for annexing Crimea and it's not like they decided to give it back it over that. Meanwhile Putin today had the country vote to extend his term by 16 years and is basically President-For-Life now. What is the US's response supposed to look like?

---

russia invaded crimea, but it would still be fucked up to open a $200 bounty on russian soldiers in the region

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Considering there wouldnt be bounties in Afghanistan on us if we werent there, I think it not only matters but is the cornerstone of the issue.

But we are getting out of Afghanistan. We signed a deal, we're on the way out.

The whole thing is weird. I don't understand what Russia's motive is in this, which is why it's troubling. Unless they are hoping that this causes us to reverse our decision and stay in Afghanistan after all?

---

in response to the topic premise, you can think we should leave afghanistan or not, but basing it purely on whether putin wants us to is straight up cowardly


---

"Just let Russia do whatever the hell it wants to us" is an interesting take

---

kevwaffles posted...

I'm not keen on troops being there either. Leaving and only leaving as a response to bounties is literally the worst option possible.

Jesus this is a take.

You think leaving would be worse than doing nothing?? What the hell??

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Jesus this is a take.

You think leaving would be worse than doing nothing?? What the hell??

read the post again

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Jesus this is a take.

You think leaving would be worse than doing nothing?? What the hell??

He means that it would look like we will surrender to bullying. Then, Russia could play the same game with Ukraine next. Then Poland. Then Germany.

But now that I think about I think it's more likely that this is what Putin wants us to think, and he really wants us to stay in Afghanistan because he knows the last 19 years of war in Afghanistan have dramatically hurt our standing on the world stage and improved Russia's.

---

Leaving only because of the bounties and doing absolutely nothing else would be very bad, yes. That's effectively sticking a "Kick Me" sign on the back of the country while also giving Russia an inflated sense of "Hey, this works and we should try it against others."

---

We'll see how it plays out. I'm glad Trump is president because he at least has some understanding of 4D chess, even if Putin is the better player. Hillary might be putting troops on the ground in Eastern Europe as we speak. Biden would......have no idea what to do and do whatever his advisers tell him.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

"Just let Russia do whatever the hell it wants to us" is an interesting take

...Thats not the take?

Related, has anyone publicly corroborated the report yet?

---

Thanks Tony
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

...Thats not the fake?

I mean, it's the logical conclusion of "any action we take against Russia will lead to war so let's not do anything"

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

...Thats not the take?

Related, has anyone publicly corroborated the report yet?

Yes
https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1278318770398932992

---

Although I gotta say you totally whiffed on Putin-y on the Bounty
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Although I gotta say you totally whiffed on Putin-y on the Bounty

nice

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Although I gotta say you totally whiffed on Putin-y on the Bounty

You have no idea how depressed I now am at what could have been

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Yes
https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1278318770398932992

He's a Democrat, though. We need a credible source.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Although I gotta say you totally whiffed on Putin-y on the Bounty

You monster, why would you tease us with this?!?!

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Although I gotta say you totally whiffed on Putin-y on the Bounty

I dont get it.

Anyway, this is a good self reminder that Democrats will go to war for appearances, too.

---

red sox 777 posted...

We'll see how it plays out. I'm glad Trump is president because he at least has some understanding of 4D chess, even if Putin is the better player. Hillary might be putting troops on the ground in Eastern Europe as we speak. Biden would......have no idea what to do and do whatever his advisers tell him.

is this sarcasm or parody?

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I dont get it.

Anyway, this is a good self reminder that Democrats will go to war for appearances, too.

Murphy has been one of the main people pushing to end the war in Yemen. He's not exactly a warmonger.

I'm not sure what type of evidence is going to convince you; at the end of the day the raw evidence will all be collected by intelligence agencies (iirc some of our European allies have corroborated it too), and if your position is that none of them can ever be trusted then we're probably at an impasse.

---

50k new COVID cases yesterday in the US, which is a record

Weeeee

---

KamikazePotato posted...

50k new COVID cases yesterday in the US, which is a record

Weeeee

usa usa

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Murphy has been one of the main people pushing to end the war in Yemen. He's not exactly a warmonger.

I'm not sure what type of evidence is going to convince you; at the end of the day the raw evidence will all be collected by intelligence agencies (iirc some of our European allies have corroborated it too), and if your position is that none of them can ever be trusted then we're probably at an impasse.

If a person in congress is willing to say on the record that it happened, I believe theres evidence.

That was more of an aside, Im most concerned about not starting WWIII, at literally any cost.


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

That was more of an aside, Im most concerned about not starting WWIII, at literally any cost.

well you're gonna have to talk to China and India about that

---

I think enabling Putin is more likely to lead to World War III than speaking out against him is.
---

pyresword posted...

I think enabling Putin is more likely to lead to World War III than speaking out against him is.

Oh please. Name one World War that started like that!

/s

---

People have a real poor understanding of what US troop presence in the world actually means.

It would be incredibly unwise to cede worldwide military dependence to Russia.

---

Tony you've lost your God damn mind.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If a person in congress is willing to say on the record that it happened, I believe theres evidence.

That was more of an aside, Im most concerned about not starting WWIII, at literally any cost.

I'm willing to believe Mitch McConnell or Donald Trump or Susan Collins or any Republican I feel is trustworthy and who isn't self-interested in saying it's true.

---

Actually, scratch that. All of them are too good at 4d chess to be reliable sources of information.

---

Beyond that, the Trump Administration - outside Trump himself, I guess - has admitted it's true, they are only disputing that Trump was personally briefed even as all the receipts keep coming in. Well, I think their current line is "We got the intel, weren't sure enough to present it to the President and now that the news has come we may never know the truth *shrug*" they keep shifting on this.

The NYT also reported on wire transfers from the GRU to the Taliban which immediately prompted a message from the Secretary of State right after it happened.

---

Trump is likely downplaying the bounty story not because of some sort of loyalty to Russia, but because he just hopes it disappears like the covid situation. He is not really about addressing anything other than his own personal grievances, actual problems are not interesting to him. Having said that, I do think that the fear of war is much more pressing a concern than the actual bounties, which are being massively overplayed. It is just a routine tactic of intelligence to fund 3rd party groups to fight your battles. It isn't worth risking a more 'hot' war over, nor is it new or something the US can prevent, and we engage in it ourselves against countries like Russia. In this situation, the lack of public response is just fine, these sorts of entanglements are not really the job of the president to respond to, the cold war business is all intel agencies, even if the 'fake news' claims are bogus.

Mitch is warning the Democrats about ending the filibuster if they win. It may be a sign he plans to end the filibuster if he wins. The Dems should consider themselves warned.

GentlemanGamer posted...

In this situation, the lack of public response is just fine, these sorts of entanglements are not really the job of the president to respond to, the cold war business is all intel agencies, even if the 'fake news' claims are bogus.

I actually generally agree with this take, but when we've got a president that's been so, uh, pro-Russia during his time in office, and the response he has given is to just scream that this is fake, you can see why people may be rightfully a bit miffed. To put it lightly. Especially when he represents the political party that claims to be strongly pro-military.

Like, I don't think anybody's actually expecting him to do truly do anything on it, but is at least acknowledging it and denouncing it too much to ask for?

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Tony you've lost your God damn mind.

Ive pretty much always been anti-war, even when I served, so can I ask you to specify what your issue is?

---

GentlemanGamer posted...

Trump is likely downplaying the bounty story not because of some sort of loyalty to Russia, but because he just hopes it disappears like the covid situation. He is not really about addressing anything other than his own personal grievances, actual problems are not interesting to him. Having said that, I do think that the fear of war is much more pressing a concern than the actual bounties, which are being massively overplayed. It is just a routine tactic of intelligence to fund 3rd party groups to fight your battles. It isn't worth risking a more 'hot' war over, nor is it new or something the US can prevent, and we engage in it ourselves against countries like Russia. In this situation, the lack of public response is just fine, these sorts of entanglements are not really the job of the president to respond to, the cold war business is all intel agencies, even if the 'fake news' claims are bogus.

Insert a Michael Scott thank you gif here.

Reg posted...

Like, I don't think anybody's actually expecting him to do truly do anything on it, but is at least acknowledging it and denouncing it too much to ask for?

With the way back channel diplomacy works, a public denouncement is meaningless, its similar to the kinda shit Republicans did to Obama when they said he wasnt tough because he didnt tell other countries to suck our dick.

---

HeroicCrono posted...

Mitch is warning the Democrats about ending the filibuster if they win. It may be a sign he plans to end the filibuster if he wins. The Dems should consider themselves warned.

That doesn't really make sense.

What you should have gotten away from that if that is true is that Mitch is worried about losing the Senate majority to the Democrats.

---

Corrik7 posted...

That doesn't really make sense.

What you should have gotten away from that if that is true is that Mitch is worried about losing the Senate majority to the Democrats.

Sure it does. Mitch is signaling that if they back off now, things can stay as they are. But if they're going to persist with trying to get rid of the filibuster, he may do the same if the shoe is on the other foot.

...what?

The democrats don't get that decision unless they're in power.

And once they're in power, either they'll do it or they won't and Mitch can't do anything about it either way.

---

HeroicCrono posted...

Sure it does. Mitch is signaling that if they back off now, things can stay as they are. But if they're going to persist with trying to get rid of the filibuster, he may do the same if the shoe is on the other foot.

Dude, that makes zero fucking sense. Hey, let's get rid of the filibuster while the Dems have the house so we can pass whatever we want in the Senate to just fail in the house? It's dumb and doesn't make sense.

He isn't threatening to do it. He is telling Dems not to do it. It will ofc eventually backfire whenever Republicans control both chambers again, but that isn't gonna happen now so McConnell isn't threatening to do it now.

---

There are still those rare occasions where I'm still stunned by some of Trump's comments, and here's one of them:

https://www.salon.com/2020/06/29/trump-to-black-americans-if-you-dont-understand-your-history-you-will-go-back-to-it-again/

In an interview with Kilmeade (Fox and Friends), Kilmeade asks Trump what his message is to black Americans in relation to the taking down of confederate statues, his reply:

"My message is that we have a great country. We have the greatest country on Earth. We have a heritage. We have a history and we should learn from the history. And if you don't understand your history, you will go back to it again. You will go right back to it. You have to learn.

Think of it: You take away that whole era, and you're going to go back to it sometime. People won't know about it. They're going to forget about it. It's OK."

A bunch of other typical gross comments like saying they "have no idea what they're ripping down" and waxing about the "beauty" of the statues but that excerpt right there jesus fucking christ.

---

xp1337 posted...

There are still those rare occasions where I'm still stunned by some of Trump's comments, and here's one of them:

https://www.salon.com/2020/06/29/trump-to-black-americans-if-you-dont-understand-your-history-you-will-go-back-to-it-again/

In an interview with Kilmeade (Fox and Friends), Kilmeade asks Trump what his message is to black Americans in relation to the taking down of confederate statues, his reply:

"My message is that we have a great country. We have the greatest country on Earth. We have a heritage. We have a history and we should learn from the history. And if you don't understand your history, you will go back to it again. You will go right back to it. You have to learn.

Think of it: You take away that whole era, and you're going to go back to it sometime. People won't know about it. They're going to forget about it. It's OK."

A bunch of other typical gross comments like saying they "have no idea what they're ripping down" and waxing about the "beauty" of the statues but that excerpt right there jesus fucking christ.

heh yeah I had that one read in a post but accidental page back mouse button click made me forget it. had the same line bolded too! (albeit different source with different follow-up line i also bolded)

trump revealing just what he means by make america great again

*edit* for real tho xp you always make posts and points I mean to make

---