Cold War Reloaded - Der neue Ost-West Konflikt

Zitat von leie

Wie macht der das nur, der findet immer treffsicher heraus, wer sich hier gerade radikalisiert.

Wer sich mal völlig radikalisierte QualitätsjournalistInnen angucken will:

Das anrufende Publikum ist auch nicht besser, bis auf einen 87 Jährigen, der meint, man habe damals auch mit der Sowjetunion Frieden schliessen können, aber natürlich sofort eines Besseren belehrt wird.

TL/DW: "Wir" sind längst im Krieg, aber man hat es dem gemeinen Pöbel einfach noch nicht klar genug gemacht, dass er sich jetzt langsam mal für den Sieg ins Zeug zu legen hat, damit die feinen Damen und Herren in den Fernsehstudios nicht selbst an die Front müssen.

(wo die übrigens auch alle hin gehören).

Zitat von Wemir

Lass mich raten, die sind alle Macron-entfesselt.

Die sind alle Vernunft-befreit.

Zitat von Wemir

Kommunisten-Marionette? Das hatte ich von Sumlenny noch nicht gesehen.

Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, Zentrum liberale Moderne, Osteuropaexperte/Kommunstenfresser...

Ist doch eine ganz normale Karriere für einen völkischen Rechtsradikalen.

P.s.:

Hatte ich vergessen: Verschwörungstheoretiker ist er natürlich auch.

A propos...

Zitat von Utan

protestantischer Puritaner

Und Jesus sprach zu ihnen, sie sollten ihre Nächsten lieben wie sich selbst - außer es sind Russen, Palästinenser oder welche von diesen feigen Pazifistenschweinen.

Zitat von Adelheid

Heißt aber vielleicht auch etwas, wenn jemand wie Kujat sich genötigt zu fühlen scheint, einem Medium wie der Weltwoche, mehrere Interviews zu geben.

Trägt jedenfalls nicht zu seiner Glaubwürdigkeit bei.

Zitat von James K. Galbraith (zitiert von Arnaud Bertrand)

[...] "This is a situation in which the sanctions were imposed by one important sector of the world economy which then cut itself off from resources that it needs - and that's particularly true of Western Europe - in return for cutting Russia off from various things that Russia doesn't really need."

Second best quote: "If you go back to the period before the introduction of the sanctions [...] the Russian economy was very heavily colonized by Western firms. That was true in automobiles, it was true in aircrafts, it was true in everything from fast food restaurants to big box stores. Western firms were present all throughout the Russian economy. A great many of them [...] either chose to exit Russia or were pressured to exit Russia after early 2022. So on what terms did they leave? Well, they were required, if they were leaving permanently, to sell their capital equipment, their factories and so forth, to let's say a Russian business which would get a loan from Russian banks or maybe have other sources of financing, at a very favorable price for the Russians. So effectively a lot of capital wealth, which was partly owned by the West, has been transferred to Russian ownership. And you now have an economy which is moving forward and has the advantage compared to Europe of relatively low resource costs because Russia is a great producer of resources, oil and gas and fertilizer and food stuff and so forth. And so while the Europeans are paying maybe twice in Germany what they were paying for energy, the Russians are not, they're paying perhaps less than they were paying before the war. So again I characterize the effect of the sanctions, in fact as being in certain respects a gift to the Russian economy. And this is, I think, quite different from what the authors of the sanctions expected. [...] And the essence of the situation is this would not have happened without the sanctions. You could have had the war, and it would have gone pretty much as it has gone. But the Russian government in 2022 was in no position to force the exit of Western firms. It didn't want to, wouldn't have done that. It was in no position to force its oligarchs to choose between Russia and the West. It didn't wish to do that. These choices were imposed by the West, and the results were actually, in many respects, favorable to the long-term independent development of the Russian Federation's economy."

P.s.:

Längere Fassung des Interviews:

NATO Can Have Ukraine or the USA—Not Both

A treaty commitment to Ukraine is a dangerous liability with no upside.

Zitat von Mike Lee - The American Conservative, 09.03.24

[...] Although its recent behavior would suggest otherwise, NATO is not a social club. At its inception, NATO is a military alliance rooted in shared security interests in the transatlantic area of responsibility. NATO is not a catch-all, feel-good get-together of democratically inclined nations. Admittance is not a stamp of global approval or a reward for good behavior—a framework antithetical to a military alliance. In fact, at this point, the alliance neither needs nor should seek additional members to achieve its stated “defensive” aims. We should consider new members only when they bring demonstrable and credible hard power, promote greater burden sharing across existing member states, and conceivably reduce the chances of sending allied troops into war. This is the only standard by which collective defense may work.

Ukraine is incompatible as a member on all fronts. What strategic value would Ukraine bring to the alliance? But for the goodwill of international donors, Ukraine would still be operating with Soviet-era weaponry and bygone military doctrine.

So much for credible hard power or meaningful burden sharing.

The entire premise undergirding NATO is that when you are under attack and your resources and capacity run low, your allies come to your aid. An ally wholly dependent on others for training, equipment, and financing is hardly an ally. As for lowering the specter of conflict, admitting Ukraine—a country of historical and strategic significance to its nuclear superpower neighbor—seems nothing less than a gamble with the lives and treasures of the alliance’s members.

Somewhere along the way, our leaders talked themselves into thinking of Ukraine as a de facto member of the alliance, despite no vote being held or change in treaty ratified. Our leaders looked Russia’s red line in the face and stepped right over it, gambling with our own security against a nuclear-capable adversary. This mistake has drained American taxpayers of $113 billion to date, with war hawks in Congress currently fighting to send another $60 billion.

Putin continues to warn us that Ukraine in NATO could be the match that sparks WWIII. As a constitutional realist, it seems to me that when the enemy gives us a clear warning, we should act with a degree of prudence, not double down without a second thought simply to anger the bad guy.

If Ukraine is in NATO, the United States should be out, plain and simple.

Alles anzeigen

Mike Lee ist ein erzkonservativer republikanischer Senator.