Funny Little Baby Injections in The Bottom | Learning Colors for Kids with Baby Doll
For more infomation >> Charlotte Strawberry. Song, family fingers. Berry pie cartoon for girls. Song fingers - Duration: 1:31. 
For more infomation >> Ghost in the Shell
For more infomation >> Renault Grand Espace 2.0T Série Limitée 25 // Trekhaak / Navi / Bluetooth / PDC / Xenon - Duration: 0:52. 
For more infomation >> Opinione su Frank Merenda - Vittorio Jonesti - Foxcar - Duration: 2:14. 
For more infomation >> Agentes de inmigración le negaron el ingreso a EEUU al mexicano que interpretó a Huicho Domínguez - Duration: 2:09. 
For more infomation >> La CIA espía y graba conversaciones a través de televisores Samsung con internet, según WikiLeaks - Duration: 2:18. 
For more infomation >> Comienza la licitación para construir el muro entre México y EEUU - Duration: 2:30. 
For more infomation >> 역대 주인공 듀얼 대회 Part 1(자막 있음) - Duration: 10:29. 
For more infomation >> Exgeneral de Panamá Manuel Antonio Noriega permanece en estado crítico tras una operación - Duration: 0:19. 
For more infomation >> Presunto encuentro entre Trump y Kislyak habría sido el 27 de abril del 2016 en Washington - Duration: 2:19. 
For more infomation >> Inteligencia del Senado investigará denuncia de Trump sobre la supuesta intervención a sus líneas - Duration: 0:25. 
For more infomation >> Tutoriel Bâtir - Duration: 2:42. 
For more infomation >> pharm016 e Learning應用4 感染課程 (字幕) - Duration: 2:55. 
For more infomation >> Renault Captur TCE 90 DYNAMIQUE | R-LINK | CLIMATE | PDC | CC - Duration: 1:01. 
For more infomation >> Volvo V40 1.6 D2 115 PK 6-Bak R-Design - Duration: 0:57. 
For more infomation >> Kia Rio 1.0 T-GDI First Edition - Duration: 0:54. 
For more infomation >> Opel Astra 1.0 T 77KW 5-DRS EDITION | NAVIGATIE | - Duration: 0:56. 
For more infomation >> Fiat Bravo T 140pk Navi Ecc Lmv Pdc2 Multiair Business - Duration: 0:41. 
For more infomation >> Opel Astra 1.4T 120pk Sport Navi Pdc Bluetooth Ecc Usb 18''LM - Duration: 1:08. 
For more infomation >> Muniba Mazari on International Women's day - Duration: 4:02. 
For more infomation >> Xyron Mega Runner and Tape Runner Adhesives - Duration: 10:10. 
For more infomation >> PAW PATROL New series Video about toys for children Puppies rescuers like the Baby Boy doll - Duration: 12:35. 
For more infomation >> Body of missing Hernando man found - Duration: 0:32. 
For more infomation >> Couple celebrates first wedding anniversary after grim cancer diagnosis - Duration: 3:00. 
For more infomation >> 4 dead after train slams into bus carrying Bastrop seniors in Biloxi - Duration: 1:53. 
For more infomation >> Volvo V70 2.5T AWD MOMENTUM AUTOMAAT 210PK LEDER PDC 16" 231DKM - Duration: 0:59. 
The New Yorker generously contributed an article into the annals of diplomacy called "Trump,
Putin, and the New Cold War - What lay behind Russia's interference in the 2016 election—and
what lies ahead?".
The moment you look at the front graphic presentation you know it's gonna be bullshit.
What… eaisario jsrg and the captions underneath the picture say "The D.N.C. hacks, many
analysts believe, were just a skirmish in a larger war against Western institutions
and alliances."
aarrrgghghhhh the Russia hacked the election card… aaaargghhhh
From a title like that, you'd expect a balanced and in depth analysis of contemporary global
politics arguing how the discourse of major superpowers – USA, Russia, China – is
unanimously increasing hostile rhetorics among nations.
You know, how the United States deploys thousands of combat-ready troops at the border of Russia.
How Russia struggles with its oil and gas deals and is actually managing to make up
for the economic sanctions by selling gas to China.
Or maybe explaining the struggle for geopolitical influence in the Middle East.
But no.
Instead you get a flat-out hit piece on bad nasty Russia doing what the United States
have been doing since WWII at a scale larger by several orders of magnitude.
If you attempt to even remotely provide an "explanation" of the global politics,
and you don't consider that everybody pursues their own selfish national security interests
to the best of their capabilities, you probably shouldn't open your mouth in the first place.
This one sided approach to the study of global politics is as damaging as flat-earthers are
to astrophysics.
Man this piece is huge.
The three dudes wrote 13,224 words that span over 37 pages.
You'd thought that by reading this you would know everything about world politics.
WRONG!
Just to give you some quantitative data on how biased this article is.
It mentions word "russia" 199 times while United states only 17 times.
It mentions Putin 103 times while Trump only 72.
But that's so disproportionate compared to 38 mentions of Obama's two terms and
37 mentions of Clinton mostly related to the Hillary's campaign.
If you wanted to take this article as an understanding of the world politics, you would have thought
that the United States is under constant military and propaganda threat from Russia that's
going after American institutions, infrastructure, and entire democracy.
Russia could barely fight Chechnya, a small republic in the North Caucasus of one million
citizens.
These bastards want to make you think Russia is at bringing down the whole West.
It takes the DNC hacks as a given fact, without question.
Because 17 intelligence agencies claimed it was Russia without providing sufficient evidence.
Everything they say is true by default, like Iraq having nuclear weapons, or Assad massacring
thousands of civilians with chemical weapons.
Blaming hacks on a state-sponsored adversary is an easy excuse, especially when there is
zero evidence for attribution.
But more often than not it's just bad security practices that exposed the data to the risks
that could have been exploited by any low-level actor.
Yahoo blamed the hacks that stole data of its 1 billion users on a state adversary,
while someone on dark web was selling Yahoo accounts login details for money.
DNC hacks say more about their cybersecurity than about who attacked them.
Here's an insight.
Russia is not a threat.
It can't afford to be.
The only thing that supports its "Great Power" status are nukes, but US has them
in roughly the same amount.
There was a study in 2009 that evaluated the state of Russian military and it said this:
"The conventional forces lack the capabilities for global power projection and effectiveness
leaves much to be desired.
This is due to obsolete equipment, inadequate training and outdated operational concepts."
This was before a proposed reform to modernize military was implemented, to which the same
report argued: "Success of the reforms would not fundamentally alter the balance of forces
with Nato."
Having slim financial resources and industrial capabilities, bad demographics for recruitment,
and no coherent profile for the armed forces, the study concluded:
The gap between Great Power claims and actual capabilities in military affairs will remain.
The only place where Russia can stand is cybersecurity but even there United States has it covered
as its combined NSA and intelligence budget is almost greater than the entire Russian
defense budget.
They have the entire world wiretapped better than anyone through various programs as we've
learned thanks to Ed Snoden.
Russia is a regional hegemon.
But the United States is a global hegemon.
No other military in the world comes even close to the US operationability, logistics,
and level of mobilization.
Russia is mostly concerned with a territory that it calls "near abroad", which describes
former Soviet republics and its immediate borders.
That has been hardly successful in operating in its own territory during first and second
Chechen wars, and the furthest it has gone was Georgia, East of Ukraine and Crimea, and
partly Syria.
While the United States operated in Bosnia, Iraq (twice), Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, and many many more if you broaden your scale.
And many of these interventions were long term, spanning over several years, including
Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan which the Americans never left since 2001.
Russian army is made to operate within 1000 km or less from its borders.
The United States intervenes across oceans with roughly around 800 to 1000 military bases
around the world.
Comparatively, the United States possesses twice as many troops, 10 aircraft carriers,
and roughly 10 times the defense budget of Russia.
While Russia has only one aircraft carrier (they sold another one to China for a floating
casino), has fewer submarines, and exceeds US only in the number nuclear warheads, but
that contributes nothing to their operation-ability since nukes are generally useless in capturing
a territory.
Russia also has more tanks than the US, but tanks are increasingly obsolete in the modern
battlefield.
Russia was surprisingly successful in Crimea only because of the easy access and political
vacuum that allowed for a unique opportunity for Russia to capture a foreign territory
directly at its borders.
Unlike anything US intervened in, Crimea had a sizable Russian population at their side.
Of course US started to perceive this as Hitler's move on Poland or the Sudetenland, claiming
Baltic states are next to be swallowed.
Baltic states are politically stable, and are actually in NATO.
Even if they weren't, Russia couldn't afford to stand on another front.
Russia struggles to maintain stability within its own borders, and is just now getting out
of deep recession it's been going through since 2014 drop of oil prices.
Russia cannot do anymore foreign interventions, forget threatening United States.
The Syria situation gets easily misinterpreted as Russia seeking influence in the Middle
East by propping up a dictator.
But actually, Russia is fighting separatists who in the name of jihad want to declare a
caliphate within their own borders in the North Caucasus.
Of course, Kremlin takes advantage of this "war on terror" by cracking down on secular
Chechen separatists to protect its oil and gas pipelines that go directly through Chechnya
to Azerbaijan and Kazakstan.
Russia ended up fighting jihadists from Al-Qaeda that the United States helped create to fight
the Soviet Union.
Russia is involved in Syria to protect integrity of its own borders and oil interests, while
United States is involved in Syria to back proxies of Turkey and Saudi Arabia to maintain
its geopolitical influence inherited from Cold war and to protect its oil interests.
Power isn't really that different.
It's the same motive and goal pursued by those who have the capacity to do it.
Claiming to explain how it works by bashing the other side while overlooking your own
is a crime against reason.
You don't have to pick sides in this debate.
You can remain independent and have a fresh and sane opinion on this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment