In a way, it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, IMHO. As soon as the mainstream media reported, “Republicans are starting to like Russia these days,” more and more Republicans thought, “Well, must be something good about it.”
If the media reported, “Republicans start to like sewage while Democrats oppose sewage-eating…”
Exactly. They see each other as fellow authoritarians being denied their god given right to oppress others, and that’s good enough for them to work together.
Are you saying homosexual men necessarily think Putin is hot?
Yes. And add to that the numerous documented instances of Trump telling aides to keep disabled veterans out of his camera shot because ‘nobody wants to see that,’ and similar expressions of his contempt for those wounded in the service of their country.
And Republicans are FINE with all that.
I get that Republicans are prone to wanting Power at Any Cost, and see nothing wrong with displays of contempt for veterans so long as they get that power (or can identify with the GOP pols who get that power).
I’m just amazed that some of them still claim to be the party of Values.
But then we’ve known for quite some time that shamelessness is the Republican superpower.
.
.
I don’t think they were ever opposed to Russia as such, however they phrased it. They certainly were never opposed to totalitarianism as such – totalitarians who were willing to abjure communism and to ally with the USA were always supported and we sometimes helped to put them in power.
They were opposed to “godless Communism”. To Communism, because it wasn’t Capitalism, and would damage business interests. To the godless part, because it bothered their sense that what they thought was Right was/is supported by God; and their sense that Right must be defined in terms of God. Putin supports the strong-man version of capitalism, and he professes and supports a branch of Christianity.
And he doesn’t support a whole mess of uppity little people saying they damn well ought to be able to live their lives differently. Which the modern Republican party never has either, though they pay lip service to the Independent Working Man – who doesn’t, theoretically, ask the State for anything or expect anything from the economic aristocracy other than to encourage his (probably his, lip service to hers, the rest of you go hide somewhere out of sight) hopes of being able to join them – despite the fact that by the nature of the setup only a small proportion of the population ever can.
Russia became the friend of Republicans when they gave their party over to Trump. The appeal of Trump is that he hates the same people that alot of self-proclaimed conservatives hate. He hates immigrants (especially those that are brown or Muslim). He hates Democrats. He hates the boogeyman “left”. He hates international institutions, such as NATO or trade organizations. And there might even be things he doesn’t hate that they think he hates. So, once he had a hook into these people via their common hatreds, they were fine with liking whatever he liked, too. I think it’s really that simple.
A post was merged into an existing topic: Hijack of thread new poster landogoshen
You’re right there is no reason we should harbor visceral unchangeable hatred for the Russian people. You’re surely wrong that the violent and corrupt dictator in charge of Russia right now is our country’s friend.
That person (Putin) desires to destroy the West in general and the USA in specific. Absent nuclear war, they lack the means. But they’re making a darn good try to wreck as much of it as they can. Between conventional military warfare, economic warfare, cyberwarfare, and propaganda warfare, they have a full court press going on to wreck the West. And are making decent progress on many fronts. Despite the temporary stalemate in Ukraine.
That crap should be stood up against most forcefully. Exactly why the US Republican party has, over the span of 20-30 years, come to find that sort of totalitarian anti-Americanism so attractive is quite a mystery. Unless you think they, or at least their leaders have become suborned stooges, or more likely, have simply realized that they too can profit from becoming totalitarians. As long as they’re the ones in charge. Then it makes complete sense.
Even if the comments about the Clintons are true, that’s a very odd metric to base that conclusion on.
There’s quite a lot of reasons we should consider them enemies of the US, not least being the myriad attacks on democracy already discussed above.
And the Russian invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated rather forcefully that NATO remains extremely relevant, although I am aware that Russia and their Republican stooges would very much like to hobble it.
So, because they changed the name of their country, that means they’re now our friends? I’m not sure how that’s relevant. They still use the same political and economic system that they did in the 70s, and that system is still opposed to free countries, for the same reasons.
I don’t think they did change the name of the country. They dissolved the union of that country with 14 other countries, but even within the USSR the largest (and dominant) constituent body was Russia.
When I was a little kid and the USSR still existed, my teachers would always correct us if we referred to the USSR as “Russia”, because it was an association of a bunch of different countries, not just Russia, and it’s important to be correct about such things.
But the more I got a more nuanced view or how geopolitics works, the more I think that little kid me was right in the first place. The USSR was mostly just Russia spreading Russian influence. The other countries were there but Russia was clearly in charge, and they only had autonomy in matters that Russia didn’t think were important. The USSR was “Russia and some Russian-influenced satellite states”
It was certainly more accurate to call the USSR “Russia” than it would have been to call the UK, “England”, even before devolution.
IMHO it’s because Putin’s desire to “destroy” the West isn’t to destroy it in the old fashioned sense. This isn’t the Spanish against the Aztecs and Inca. This isn’t Andrew Jackson against the Cherokee. This isn’t Hitler against the Soviet Union. Putin doesn’t want to destroy the West in that type of sense. He is instead trying to remake it in the image of what Russia is currently. Since the Republicans (for some reason which makes no sense to me on an emotional level) think that this is a swell idea, they side with Putin in furtherance of that goal.
There’s a reason all of the former Warsaw Pact nations and the Baltic states wanted to join NATO so badly once the Soviet Union collapsed, and it certainly wasn’t because they wanted to join an obsolete organization and lacked any historical reason to fear Russian aggression and expansionism.
It’s almost like the Russian invasion of Ukraine is evidence of just how justified those fears are; it’s even driven Finland and Sweden to join this ‘obsolete organization.’
ETA: @FlikTheBlue 2 posts up.
Well said. Putin doesn’t need the West to be a smoking crater, nor a collection of vassal states as the 'stans were within the USSR.
What he wants / needs, is for them to collapse into gangster autocracies like his. At which point the leaders of all those places can make a certain amount of common cause with each other while looting the rest of their respective populations.
Call it peace amongst the “Mafiosi” if you will. The crime goes on unabated but they agree to quit badgering each other directly.
@Dissonance: 'Zactly. And Putin has certainly given Ukraine reason to also want to join this so-called “obsolete” organization.
Experts on transatlantic relations disagree with you. I think I’ll listen to them.
Finland and Sweden disagree with you in terms of “necessity”. They seem to feel NATO membership is very necessary, especially now that Russia has shown they are happy to invade any non-NATO neighbor. I think I’ll listen to them.
Your opinions on NATO are very much an outlier, and the only country that would agree with your opinions is … coincidentally perhaps, Russia.
13 posts were split to a new topic: Hijack of thread new poster
The troll was banned and his posts cornfielded.
Sorry the thread split did apparently not work, I am redirected to “this page does not exist or is private”, thus my answer here lest I forget:
The Comintern part is not completely false, although one could argue in that sense. But the KGB part is completely false. Only by splitting hairs and claiming that it is no longer the KGB because they are called FSB now could one try to convince a very ignorant third party of that assertion.
Thank you, Gyrate, you took the words out of my mouth.
My interpretation is that the split-off thread has been cornfielded, whether temporarily or permanently. The offending poster has now been suspended for the next couple of days.
Who knows what’ll happen after that.
Yes, if you had the opportunity to see the ‘missing’ posts, let’s just say that there are umm… reasons that they aren’t here anymore.