General Russian foreign entanglements thread

[T.Lex]

I guess we'll see. Russia has used energy dependence as leverage. We are beginning to use export dependency as leverage

I'm not sure if the hand was weaker or we lacked someone ruthless enough to play to win

Please list the effective actions taken by the EU in the wake of South Ossetia, the Russo-Georgian war and the destabilization of Ukraine and occupation of Crimea. It's in their own back yard; if they won't arm and aid those willing to resist, should we?

Are you suggesting a return to proxy wars (let's save aguing over 'return' for another time)

We chose to lead (or not) on military matters. We are (were?) the superpower. If we weren't willing to lead on those matters, why should they?

August 2008 - that was a tricky time, no? Putin was confident that we couldn't/wouldn't do anything. At that point, we had a VERY weak hand.

But Trump likes to project strength. If he really wanted to do that against Russia, there are plenty of legitimate angles he could take. He is choosing not to.

 

[BugI02]

I think you are being a bit disingenuous. Trump was elected predominantly to solve domestic problems, that was and is his primary mandate. How many other problems does he have to solve concurrently? I think that depends on how he prioritizes them. Again, pick your battles

Russia hasn't (overtly) been threatening to nuke the US, nor has it expressed a desire to control the world economic system or emerging technologies. Nor has it been damaging the US economy with what amounts to economic warfare. That, IMO, is why China and the DPRK take precedence

Where strength needed to be projected I don't think he was shy. Remember the massive strike on Russian and Russian aligned elements moving on friendly positions in Syria? Didn't that kill a bunch of Russians? Do you think that made them think we were weak. I think Trump has a pretty good grasp of the limits of power, especially in direct contention with another super power. ISIS was important to us, Syria not so much

 

[BugI02]

Which would be truly a bigger problem for the US; if Russia took the rest of Georgia and the rest of Ukraine, or if the Chinese exerted successful military control of the SCS

Which would be a bigger problem for the EU?

 

[T.Lex]

I think you are being a bit disingenuous. Trump was elected predominantly to solve domestic problems, that was and is his primary mandate. How many other problems does he have to solve concurrently? I think that depends on how he prioritizes them. Again, pick your battles

Russia hasn't (overtly) been threatening to nuke the US, nor has it expressed a desire to control the world economic system or emerging technologies. Nor has it been damaging the US economy with what amounts to economic warfare. That, IMO, is why China and the DPRK take precedence

Where strength needed to be projected I don't think he was shy. Remember the massive strike on Russian and Russian aligned elements moving on friendly positions in Syria? Didn't that kill a bunch of Russians? Do you think that made them think we were weak. I think Trump has a pretty good grasp of the limits of power, especially in direct contention with another super power. ISIS was important to us, Syria not so much

Several points, in no particular order:
- Absolutely concur that Trump - and every POTUS - has the authority to prioritize, strategize and monopolize. (Only threw that last one in there for the rhyme.) Trumps efforts to prioritize FAR exceed his predecessor's, in the sense that there did not seem to be any sense of priorities or coherent strategy. Regardless of the opinions on whether the priority is "right," he is doing better than what we had. IMHO.

- Not sure what the disingenuous part is. He's POTUS. He asked for the job and got it. I didn't see Obama getting any benefit of the doubt for having alot on his plate. So who's really being disingenuous?

- Russia has more effectively delivered body blows against us than any other foreign power (outside our own leakers). This doesn't even include the election thing. The cyber stuff directed at our infrastructure and businesses is really being left out of the MSM, but it is real.

- The "projected strength" thing is a subset (or even re-casting) of priorities. He's not projecting strength to China, not in the SCS, not in Taiwan, not in the trade war. (You only complain about tariffs if you're on the losing side.) While I continue to believe the 1-1 meeting with the DPRK was a good move, it didn't really project strength. At least not in the way we historically have.

- Trump has no concept on limitations to his power.

 

[BugI02]

Several points, in no particular order:
- Absolutely concur that Trump - and every POTUS - has the authority to prioritize, strategize and monopolize. (Only threw that last one in there for the rhyme.) Trumps efforts to prioritize FAR exceed his predecessor's, in the sense that there did not seem to be any sense of priorities or coherent strategy. Regardless of the opinions on whether the priority is "right," he is doing better than what we had. IMHO.

- Not sure what the disingenuous part is. He's POTUS. He asked for the job and got it. I didn't see Obama getting any benefit of the doubt for having alot on his plate. So who's really being disingenuous?

[I must have missed where Trump ran on an "I'll solve all the worlds problems" platform. Why should he expend energy and resources solving problems that he doesn't think are pressing. I think he has made it manifestly clear that he intends to solve the US's pressing problems first and foremost. If that isn't a clear indication that he sees the limitations of US power, then feel free to elect another president intent on bringing democracy to the world (whether they want it or not). If Obama had 'a lot on his plate', perhaps he should have put down the serving spoon and stopped adding more. You don't get props for how many balls you attempt to juggle, only for how many you can keep in the air]

- Russia has more effectively delivered body blows against us than any other foreign power (outside our own leakers). This doesn't even include the election thing. The cyber stuff directed at our infrastructure and businesses is really being left out of the MSM, but it is real.

[Not sure we can agree on this. The Chinese have been much more active, much more aggressive and much more successful in this area - stealing commercial as well as military secrets. Perhaps some examples of that which you speak? Remember, I likely don't pay as close attention to this as you do]

- The "projected strength" thing is a subset (or even re-casting) of priorities. He's not projecting strength to China, not in the SCS, not in Taiwan, not in the trade war. (You only complain about tariffs if you're on the losing side.) While I continue to believe the 1-1 meeting with the DPRK was a good move, it didn't really project strength. At least not in the way we historically have.

[I think tariffs are pushing China right in a huge vulnerability, and I think showing willingness to prosecute them to the limit is indeed projecting strength. On Taiwan, I believe we approved a sale of advanced weapons systems to them shortly after Trump took office. Would you have us sail a carrier group through the Taiwan strait at the same time the Chinese do? Should we attack the man-made islands in the SCS and evict the Chinese? The very arguments you bring up I see as evidence of his consciousness of the limits to his power. IMO Trump is correct, a strong US economy underpins everything else that we might wish to do and is most certainly job one. Who do you think was paying for island building, the Chinese military build up, belt and road and China 2025. A strong trade imbalance underpinned everything they wished to do]

- Trump has no concept on limitations to his power.

We shall have to disagree on that interpretation

 

[NKBJ]

Actually the crux of the matter is that Russia is poking a finger in the eye of western banking empire and sits squarely in the middle of the world island, thus being a major impediment to world conquest. Trump maneuvering to deal with the creep state's displeasure at such Russian effrontery is making for quite a show.

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45421445

The UK thinks they've identified 2 of the Russian agents responsible for the novichok poisoning. It isn't as dramatic as some other spy reveals have been, but it is interesting.

 

[Trigger Time]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45421445

The UK thinks they've identified 2 of the Russian agents responsible for the novichok poisoning. It isn't as dramatic as some other spy reveals have been, but it is interesting.

Waiting for ww3 to start. Our side seems not to have any balls.

 

[T.Lex]

More and more, I'm starting to think that we're already in it. Especially taking into account cyber. I have some friends in that segment, and it is incredible how real it is.

The whole thing may or may not spill over into a shooting war, but I wonder if the books published 20 years from now will describe how certain countries were allied against others, without their populations necessarily realizing it.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Papadopoulos Sentenced... to 14 days!

https://www.nationalreview.com/news...sentenced-for-lying-to-mueller-investigators/

So the max for lying/obstructing is 5 years... Mueller asked for 6 months... got two weeks and community service.

I think that says it all about this particular "major" story line.

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.nationalreview.com/news...sentenced-for-lying-to-mueller-investigators/

So the max for lying/obstructing is 5 years... Mueller asked for 6 months... got two weeks and community service.

I think that says it all about this particular "major" story line.

There is another shoe. That's the kind of deal a songbird gets.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

There is another shoe. That's the kind of deal a songbird gets.

Don't songbirds normally get a reduced sentence on a major charge in exchange for cooperation? In this case, the sole charge was NOT COOPERATING, but rather obstructing by lying. The sentence could simply convey how big the judge thought the lie was.

Also, the sweetheart deal is held until after the songbird "sings" in front of a jury to convict a bigger fish. Gotta keep the feet to the fire until the songbird delivers. Didn't happen here...

It's pretty apparent that THIS is not THAT. What you see is what you get...

 

[T.Lex]

Don't songbirds normally get a reduced sentence on a major charge in exchange for cooperation? In this case, the sole charge was NOT COOPERATING, but rather obstructing by lying. The sentence could simply convey how big the judge thought the lie was.

Also, the sweetheart deal is held until after the songbird "sings" in front of a jury to convict a bigger fish. Gotta keep the feet to the fire until the songbird delivers. Didn't happen here...

It's pretty apparent that THIS is not THAT. What you see is what you get...

I'll just note that there are different ways for this kind of thing to play out. And we'll just have to wait and see....

 

[T.Lex]

So a couple days ago, Putin predicted the Russian men accused by the Brits would come forward.

Whaddaya know, they did!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45509697

Turns out they are a couple guys in the "nutrients" business, who traveled to Salisbury to see the cathedral there 2 days in a row, stayed in the same hotel room, then left.

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...se-spying-activities-in-country-idUSKCN1LW0MM

Apparently Russia has been targeting various facilities in Switzerland for variously helping the Brits in the novichok investigation and helping the IOC in the Russian Olympic team doping and who knows what else.

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45591103

So this is interesting - the presentation of the GRU guys as innocent tourists appears to be backfiring domestically in Russia.

But the cover-up seems to have backfired as badly as the actual operation. Instead of quaking with fright, many Russians are laughing at their spies instead.
"It's not just teasing, it's mockery. I have friends who couldn't believe our lot could be so rotten," Gennady Gudkov admits. "Now they call me, and they believe."

Apparently, there's speculation that some of the more important state security groups feel emboldened to go rogue to try to impress Putin. That's problematic, to say the least.

 

[T.Lex]

An investigative reporting site thinks they ID'd for real one of the guys... as a KGB colonel.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45656004

I'm really curious how the site managed to get passport extracts. That's probably not legal.

But yeah, they're probably right.

We may be witnessing a very public catfight between competing oligarchs.

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45746837

More press from several countries, including the US, about Russian spy activities.

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45791378

Bellingcat claims to have identified the second novichok agent as Russian military doctor. They appear to have access to passport and visa information, which is very interesting.

Still thinking that we're seeing the external effects of internal dogfighting among the oligarchs.

 

[T.Lex]

So the Russian media company RT (formerly known as "Russia Today") sent a Christmas gift to certain partners in the media world.

It was a chocolate replica of the Salisbury Cathedral. That's the tourist destination that the 2 Russian intelligence officers were supposedly visiting when they poisoned the Skripals.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-wiltshire-46699507

That's kinda funny, in a terrible, terrible way.