|
GaussianCopula posted:Is he? I don't remember the actual event but there was a time in recent years where he acted completely irrationally. Recently there were dozens of russian incursions in european airspace. What's the point ?
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Is he? He knew after observing American inaction in Syria that he could take the Crimea, because Obama would do nothing of consequence to stop him. Just because he could rationally assess that he could do something with little consequence doesn't mean he's any less insane for it. Granted, I don't think it's a useful descriptor for him. Calling him a selfish, power-hungry autocrat would be more apt. The annexation of Crimea in the manner in which it happened, the continued friction with Ukraine, and the other points of friction he's elected to fan the flames of, satisfy his need for a source of popularity at the long-term cost of peace and harmony among states. I would rather that neither I nor anyone else end up suffering so that Putin can prove to the Russian people that his dick is huge, but that's where we are now, and where we're very likely to continue to be in future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:I don't remember the actual event but there was a time in recent years where he acted completely irrationally. To mock Europe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Just because he could rationally assess that he could do something with little consequence doesn't mean he's any less insane for it. Granted, I don't think it's a useful descriptor for him. Calling him a selfish, power-hungry autocrat would be more apt. The annexation of Crimea in the manner in which it happened, the continued friction with Ukraine, and the other points of friction he's elected to fan the flames of, satisfy his need for a source of popularity at the long-term cost of peace and harmony among states. I would rather that neither I nor anyone else end up suffering so that Putin can prove to the Russian people that his dick is huge, but that's where we are now, and where we're very likely to continue to be in future. There is a cynical logic to what he is doing, and while aggressive, it does seem he is essentially playing "chess" with humanity. If anything I think he is stupid or insane is more dangerous than acknowledging he is actually logical and a real threat. For me, the troubling part is there isn't really any sort of leader or leadership left in the West to challenge him more than relatively nominally. While the West still have an absurd economic and military advantage, there seems very little desire to win the game essentially. Putin is beatable, but as long as his strategy goes unchallenged he is going to win by default.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 11:42
|
|
|
More powerful smaller states (or factions within a state) that keep infighting over petty disputes while blatantly ignoring a (rising) powerful strongman on their borders until it is too late is essentially History 101.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 11:49
|
|
|
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no-10-covered-up-trident-missile-fiasco-hch3shsrn lmbo. I would comment something but reality is funnier than anything I can think of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:While the West still have an absurd economic and military advantage, there seems very little desire to win the game essentially. How do you define "winning" here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Russia is a paper tiger but everyone else is just a stack of papers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Kassad posted:How do you define "winning" here? For the Russians, neutralizing the US/NATO as an effective entity that could oppose then while they return to dominance in the former Soviet Union. Ultimately, the hope is probably to probably "Finlandize" the EU not destroy it. Basically, make the EU a neutral entity that is too divided to oppose Russian interests in Eastern Europe but nevertheless is stable enough to sell energy to. This probably also includes dividing up much of Eurasia with China, with China's sphere including East Asia and Africa while Russia obviously dominates Europe and the Middle East. Latin America would be of "mixed control" between Russia/China/US. Moreover, the Chinese will help essentially bankroll this project in exchange for access to energy from Russia and access to western markets. At this point Putin's biggest roadblock is Merkel at this point who can see combat considerable influence in the EU, enough to stymie Russian efforts. That said, Italy/France/Netherlands seem to be trending in their favor. None of this is nuts considering it looks like we smack in the middle of this project as it is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Just because he could rationally assess that he could do something with little consequence doesn't mean he's any less insane for it. Granted, I don't think it's a useful descriptor for him. Calling him a selfish, power-hungry autocrat would be more apt. The annexation of Crimea in the manner in which it happened, the continued friction with Ukraine, and the other points of friction he's elected to fan the flames of, satisfy his need for a source of popularity at the long-term cost of peace and harmony among states. I would rather that neither I nor anyone else end up suffering so that Putin can prove to the Russian people that his dick is huge, but that's where we are now, and where we're very likely to continue to be in future. There were far more reasons for Crimea happening than just some rally-round-the-flag points, that was but one small benefit. You call 'peace and harmony' a long term cost but it's not at all-- all of this ensured the port in crimea is staying in russian hands for a very long time and the resultant chaos has ensured Ukraine will not be in the EU for a very long time. Win Win. Putin was already popular enough at any rate, getting an additional bump was nice of course but there's not much evidence to support it being one of the primary motivators.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
#French_PS_Primaries OK in the end I didn't vote because I couldn't bring myself to care. My wife voted for Hamon. That's my story for today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
I think making sure Valls doesn't win is a worthwhile goal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
What's the outcome that makes it least likely the run off will be Fillon vs. LePen?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
I sure as hell didn't vote, I'm visiting the Harry Potter studios in London (they own) and having a great time. Baron Corbyn posted:What's the outcome that makes it least likely the run off will be Fillon vs. LePen? Montebourg winning and stepping behind Mélenchon
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:What's the outcome that makes it least likely the run off will be Fillon vs. LePen? e: that was poorly phrased on my part - what I meant was that the only plausible way for Le Pen to be kept out of the second round is for the PS to run a far left candidate. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Jan 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Based on the available polling, that would only happen if the PS ran the farthest left candidate possible so the centrist PS vote all goes for Macron. The polls I've seen suggest Hamon might win the primary so that could happen?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
Not sure what the story is now or if means much but turnout was around 450k at lunchtime whereas it was over 1m at the same time in the LR primary. Think it was harder/less easy to register for the PS one though. Makes for poo poo headlines though
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
I don't see how it could have been easier to vote for the FGOP primaries. Here it was just tell which locality you're from, give one euro, sign the register, and put a ballot in the urn.
Cat Mattress fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Jan 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Oh I was probably thinking for the online method for expats. My wife tried last week and said the cut off for online registration as 4th Jan
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
i wanted to vote 20 mins ago but it was closed  wanted to vote Hamon for his very Jojo name
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:I don't see how it could have been easier to vote for the FGOP primaries. Here it was just tell which locality you're from, give one euro, sign the register, and put a ballot in the urn. You need to pay to vote?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Eezee posted:You need to pay to vote? For the Primaries yes. It's to provide a disincentive for your political opponents to try and rig your primary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Eezee posted:You need to pay to vote? It was cheaper than for the Républicain primary, too. Hamon beating Valls fills me with joy in the short term, but I fear it might hurt Mélenchon's numbers. On the other hand, his name recognition is much lower, so who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
here's a video of the results of the primaries https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqc_27cpQ80
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
First results are in, Hamon in the lead at 35%, Valls behind with 31%, Montebourg in third with 18% and everyone else with comedy numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
gently caress off Valls
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Well I'm voting Hamon next sunday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:wanted to vote Hamon for his very Jojo name Toutank Hamon for Pharaoh
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Peillon is so loving boring Jesus Christ
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
julian assflange posted:Peillon is so loving boring Jesus Christ He's a philosophy teacher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
julian assflange posted:Peillon is so loving boring Jesus Christ
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
I'm not sure "exciting" is a quality we necessarily need in heads of state guys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:I'm not sure "exciting" is a quality we necessarily need in heads of state guys. His hands are so goddamn tiny. It's freaking me out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:For the Primaries yes. It's to provide a disincentive for your political opponents to try and rig your primary. How is having to pay €1 going to stop that
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:How is having to pay €1 going to stop that
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Since the opponents are the right wing, they could write "caisse de solidarité des fonctionnaires en grève" on the money box to make sure there's no attempt at sabotage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Since the opponents are the right wing, they could write "caisse de solidarité des fonctionnaires en grève" on the money box to make sure there's no attempt at sabotage. Or "Help me finance my interracial gay marriage!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
tsa posted:There were far more reasons for Crimea happening than just some rally-round-the-flag points, that was but one small benefit. You call 'peace and harmony' a long term cost but it's not at all-- all of this ensured the port in crimea is staying in russian hands for a very long time and the resultant chaos has ensured Ukraine will not be in the EU for a very long time. Win Win. Putin was already popular enough at any rate, getting an additional bump was nice of course but there's not much evidence to support it being one of the primary motivators. By far the most generous interpretation you can have for Putin's foreign policy is that he's an ideologue nationalist that believes in putting his country first. But that is still selfishly putting what he believes is important over the welfare of everyone else. By that interpretation, he is trying to satisfy his need for what he perceives to be good leadership, and in that quest he's sacrificed the lives of ordinary people who had to suffer through the Ukrainian conflict and the livelihoods of people affected by his antagonising the west. Perhaps then I should retract my statement on this being a more generous view; in this case, where he's not looking for popular approval, he's not trying to prove to the Russian people that his dick is huge, but to himself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
YF-23 posted:By far the most generous interpretation you can have for Putin's foreign policy is that he's an ideologue nationalist that believes in putting his country first. But that is still selfishly putting what he believes is important over the welfare of everyone else. By that interpretation, he is trying to satisfy his need for what he perceives to be good leadership, and in that quest he's sacrificed the lives of ordinary people who had to suffer through the Ukrainian conflict and the livelihoods of people affected by his antagonising the west. Perhaps then I should retract my statement on this being a more generous view; in this case, where he's not looking for popular approval, he's not trying to prove to the Russian people that his dick is huge, but to himself. He is looking for popular approval because he knows that revolutions do happen time to time in Russia and that in order to keep on leeching from the country, he needs to control it completely. Part of that control is coming up with schemes to both distract the population and expands Russia's interest abroad. If should know anything about Putin, is that he was doing all types of shady poo poo in St.Petersburg during the 1990s and his reputation for corruption is well deserved.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2017 00:17
|
|