Biden and his administration, just like previous administrations, have been asking Germany and the other NATO members to up their commitment to their own, and by extension the entire alliances military capabilities. In fact, I find it hard to believe he hasn’t been doing that, especially since this all started. And assuring our allies that the US has their backs, so doing stuff like this will only be to their and everyone’s collective benefit.
That’s my take, FWIW. How much of a factor it’s been is certainly debatable, but I don’t think it was nothing.
If you don’t mind me saying so, you are not quite as clever as you think you are (or you are being disingenuous). There has been very limited inflation for decades so there is bound to be some and it WILL take a while to shake out (in general when one thing has been true for a significant period of time- things often pendulum to the opposite extreme until after a series of over corrections in opposite directions – the situation arrives at some sort of synthesis). But that is not the error in your logic.
Your error is that you took thirty years of national averages and compared it to one data point-- YOUR income adjustment. It is a tactic that people like Rush Limbaugh used to, and Tucker Carlson still uses to create a “truth” that has nothing to do with real life.
Now I am going to assume that you are just stating your opinions, I do that here all the time. But almost everyone here is smarter than I am and if I can spot problems like that on a first reading, you are not going to influence many minds here with weak stuff like that.
In another place you claimed Biden was basically a dithering idiot and as an authoritative source you used a comedian-- someone who for their career exaggerates situations to poke fun at it. What is more, you used one who suffered from mental health issues and tragically took his own life – so not a great appeal to authority.
Lastly, I hate doing this. But I do want to hear the voice of others. Especially others who disagree with me – as long as they are smart enough and open enough and strong enough to recognize facts and to debate seriously. Now, please try again with a little more serious attitude. This is not a local bar where everyone gets to have their say. It is more like a faculty luncheon where everyone is an expert at something and well read on everything else. (Believe me, I have tried to get local Dopers [as we refer to ourselves] to go drinking with me in dive bars and no one has ever taken me up on it.)
To summarize, I want to hear what you have to say. Please say it in a more thought out manner. Thank you for your time, I look forward to your future posts.
Okay, thank you. And I guess we are not supposed to engage them, sorry. I was hoping to shape the conversation in a more productive direction. If he does return, perhaps he will have a more refined world view (I will continue to hope without holding my breath).
About that I am quite serious. I was just like the people I resent and attack now-a-days ten or twelve years ago. Reading the dope, listening to NPR daily, reading sources instead of relying upon first kneejerk reactions, and just being open to and eager for the truth have completely revamped my world view. Of course my former political party helped me see the error of my previous ways by becoming - - - oh, let’s call it different (okay, insane is a better descriptor).
Oh, you can engage them until they are discovered and kicked off the forum, or even beyond. There’s no prohibition. It’s just kind of a waste of your time, because they’re not here to engage in honest debate and once they’re kicked off, they can’t respond to you. They’re only here to disrupt the forum for whatever their reasons.
I’ve debated with them too, until it was learned they are a troll and/or a sock. I just thought you’d want to know.
When this thread was created, doubts about Biden felt all-too-real and disheartening. Then Putin made what looks like the political mistake of the century. If he had stayed with his original plan of taking over the declared “independent” provinces in eastern Ukraine, Biden would have looked weak and any repercussions on the economy would be on him.
Today, all the right-wing supporters of Putin come across as flaming assholes, reporters on Fox News are correcting the Trumpian Guard on air, the Ukrainians have become the world’s darlings, and countries are competing to impose ever-stricter sanctions to condemn Russia to the Dark Ages, while Russian troops are portrayed as cowardly buffoons rather than an invincible force.
Now this could all change tomorrow. The use of nukes would change the conversation forever and in utterly unpredictable ways. What history should tell us is to never try to predict the consequences of a crisis. “The future’s uncertain and the end is always near.”
Putin giving the order to launch (or even saber rattle in a lesser manner like showing missile command commanders going through their procedures on news broadcasts)?
Commanders disobeying the orders if they do come?
It is hard to imagine reasonable, professional soldiers being willing to use a weapon of mass destruction and ruining a huge portion of the world knowing that A) It will trigger the MAD retaliation, and B) the whole justification of this conflict is fictional. On the other hand Strategic Command solders are chosen for their psychological predictability and are trained to follow orders no matter what (there are many scenarios where command and control are already compromised when launch orders are issued).
I doubt it. I mean, if you ask ‘is there any chance’ then sure…but I’d rate it an extremely low probability. I think this was Putin trying to underscore to the west that Russia has nukes (in case we all forgot, of course).
Again, it’s possible, and, in this case, I’d say more probable than Putin ordering such a strike unilaterally.
Putin’s partly making a very loud assertion of “don’t anyone else try anything or we’ll mess you up” for the ears of the home audience, so that he can say “nobody intervened because I scared them with our nukes.”