This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
The West is not without blunders that benefit Moscow. The 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion by CIA-trained anti-Castro exiles embarrassed the U.S. America’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 despite opposition from Russia helped it gain stature.
I can't even parse that last sentence.
~~Luigi~~ Moscow wins by doing absolutely nothing?
yeah same, like wtf is it even trying to say
This article is written in the premise that these "mistakes" are any action that causes the US to take a hostile action. Presumably the ideal strategy would be to tiptoe around the US and never act counter to it's agenda.
It's the tune of an imperialist. The empire has only one direction and if you get hurt standing in its way it's your own fault. Let's not mention the likelihood that you'll get hurt anyway.
The most used answer in a political scientist's toolbox is "it depends". Stalin's decision to not antagonize the US after WW2 was intelligent given that the USSR was fried after the Revolution, Civil War, invasions by the West, and obviously WW2. They were simply not capable of fighting and needed years of peace to build up, even if that meant being unable to help in the revolution in Greece and the Civil War in Korea (at least not sending troops). Khrushchev's decision to put the barrel of the nuclear gun pointed at America's dick in the September Crisis (aka Cuban Missile Crisis in the West) was boneheaded and an unnecessary escalation. Every nation, no matter how repugnant has the right to self-defense from foreign nations. But Russia pushing back on NATO is totally valid, even if invading Ukraine isn't good, I don't know what other realistic options they had.
Right now the US is caught flat-footed after the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan, with two neo-military base puppet nations (Israel and Saudi Arabia) being rebellious and not following the US's commands exactly, a string of very unpopular US leaders, their government showing cracks in its stability, an economy that is languishing from a recession they cannot recover from. So it is the most opportune time to press hard on them. Not to mention, the PRC continues to grow and is even mending bridges with Vietnam (a potential ally the US has been courting heavily for decades now), as BRICS+ expands in size and importance.
That's right, everybody should just bend the knee or else.
yeah but you get basically the same treatment if you bend the knee or not. at least, russia would. so yeah, seems super tempting to just go along with shit.
Oh yeah for sure, we can see the treatment Europe is getting right now with US selling overpriced LNG and plundering European industry.
Check out this one from the Murdoch media lol
churchill is the hitler
Churchill would defeat Putin just like he defeated Stalin.
Wait did they suggest Churchill defeated Hitler?
Military historian Lord Roberts
Yup, seems so, lmao.
it was actually degaulle and hitler that defeated the nazis together. EU STRONK.
incredible stuff
Wasn't The Hill one of the first newspapers to publish an article about Ukraine having no chance to win??
Also this article is completely surreal it kinda reads like a DMT trip report
LMFAO it really does, it's like one of those Tom Clancy novels come to life. 😂
A participant dressed in Red Army World War II uniform in the role of a military traffic controller takes part in a theatrical performance
That's.... That's literally just a guy in winter clothes?????????
What level of Cold War-themed brain bugs do you need to have to start hallucinating members of the Red Army walking through the streets of D.C. on a cold January morning?
It's becoming pretty clear that the fact that USSR was communist had little to do with anything. What US hated the most is that they had competition, and now that Russia is no longer communist, they just use the same narrative because to them it does not matter.
It's absolutely wild to see the fingerprints of Talleyrand on political decisions taken over 200 years later half world away.
ha
Russia was so poor back then that anyone not in the army had had no clothes at all! You really should know these things if you profess to be a leftist. Tisk tisk and I give this comment two and a half Pinocchios.
Based on my advanced Hat Ideology Technology (Hatideonology), one of the children from South Park is a communist. It's the Jewish one. Kyle is a (Judeo-Bolshevik) communist.
I felt fucking filthy writing that. But I don't doubt that was those libertarian shitholes' intent. Wowza, am I ever off on a tangent.
Anyway fuck South Park.
Seriously? I’m 42. I teach in a College and work in research in University. I have a master’s degree from U of Montreal and a Doctorate from Concordia. I’ve read more books then you will in your entire life. My mom is from a first nation community and my dad is a french canadian. I think this sub is fucking pathetic. I’m not sure what exactly Chappo Lemmygrad is, but it’s seems you people need them to tell you what to think. You guys are behaving EXACTLY like Trump supporters: privilege white people behaving like they are better then everyone. Toxic AF. Wannna tell me about you? Did you ever accomplished anything interesting or do you just tell people on the internet they suck to make you feel good?
This is quality shitposting.
I wish I wasn't so late in responding. At least I have it saved so I can respond immediately the next time someone says something negative about South Park.
It has done so again with the murder of Alexei Navalny
They say this as if it were a proven fact.
It's especially hilarious given that even Ukrainians contradict them on this.
According to reddit, that's Budanov playing 4D chess and not wanting to reveal his sources inside the Russian prison system.
lol
William Courtney is an adjunct senior fellow at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation, and was U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan and Georgia and senior advisor at the Helsinki Commission.
This guy is 70 years old, and from his resume it seems like he ought to know a few things, yet here we are.
I get the impression he's still living in the Cold War. 😂
There's a whole industry of "Sovietologists" who had nothing to do after the Cold War ended, so now they try to relive the glory days in US newspapers.
yeah basically
"In 1962, the USSR secretly tried to install nuclear-armed missiles in Cuba. After the U.S. imposed a naval quarantine, it withdrew. Soviet leaders saw the retreat as “bordering on humiliation.” The U.S. won wide praise for deftly managing the crisis."
Oh, is that what happened, The Hill?
Because I recall reading/learning that after Castro overthrew the US-favored assclown Batista in a popular revolution, the US via CIA and other secret orgs funded the gathering together of ex-Cuban, now American, counterrevolutionaries, who had fled in the wake of Castro and Che cracking down on those pieces of shit. Eventually this resulted in the somewhat comical Bay of Pigs failed invasion of Cuba by the US- oh I mean by the American ex-Cubans working with CIA money and backing... but not the US official sanctioning. Classic. Btw if the US gov say they'll pay for all your shit but won't go as far as openly claiming you if shit hits the fan you can be sure shit is about to hit the biggest fan and you are about to die.
Anyway, the US had also conveniently and brazenly placed Jupiter missiles with nuclear payloads inside Turkey within easy striking distance of the Kremlin and Moscow. A massive provocation which the US would never tolerate in a role reversal (proven immediately after!).
So the Cuba and USSR work out a plan to move nukes, secretly, to Cuba so that the next time the US decides to start fucking around they can lean back and go "oh? What do you think about these big boys?" This effectively gave Cuba full protection from further US invasions because that would result in nuclear missiles landing in the continental US. It also allowed the USSR to be on equal footing again, with a counter to the US's Turkish nukes. Win-win.
US: "Cuba and USSR consent, yes, but didn't you forget to ask someone else?"
The United States caught wind of the nukes and, somewhat understandably, but also in a fully hypocritical fashion simultaneously, flipped its fucking shit. They were talking about invading Cuba still anyway and I guess just sort of "tanking" any resulting nuclear fallout to send a message of strength to the Soviets/world (ie that the Americans are fucking insane and willing to die in nuclear apocalypse before allowing Soviet victory. Not the first or last time this happened!). Luckily this all did get resolved basically only because the Soviets finally blinked, probably because they knew the Americans were actually insane enough to die. Of course the promise with Kennedy, before his brains got splattered all over his wife, was that the Soviets openly withdraw their missiles and the US would also withdraw the Jupiter missiles. Pretty sure the latter did not happen... the US got a little distracted, one might say.
So, the suggestion that the USSR was the aggressor is fucking imperial propaganda. No other term for it. You can argue the Soviets made mistakes, whatever, but to frame them as the ones to cause the crisis is purely and fully a lie. Unless you're into victim blaming (the US is).
I also don't think the withdrawal of the Soviets, who had gotten concessions from JFK, was seen as embarrassing for the USSR more so like "holy fuck, the US is batshit insane... this is worse than we ever imagined." After the US military and intelligence reaction to events.
Again, imperial propaganda framing absolute bloodthirst and an objectively insane reaction based on a chain of events begun by an over reaction to the overthrow of a dictator. These right wing warhawk types think that immediately smashing the "withdraw right the fuck now or we will invade you, nukes be damned!" at the first slight reaction to your actions... is good?
They still act like this btw. Eg the retaliation against "Iranian-backed" MENA region militants recently. The US is doing a fucking genocide in Palestine, bombing Yemen again, and threatening the entire region. Three military die in a place the US never belonged to begin with and immediately everyone with Col or Gen in their name is screaming to the sky about nuking Tehran.
Dogshit, batshit country
more so like “holy fuck, the US is batshit insane…
This is how it was portrayed in Polish media before 1989, USSR shown their goodwill and retreated before the USA aggression, while getting guarantees for Cuban independence, which was basically the reason for it happening in the first place, so essentially a win.
That seems like the most honest assessment of things. I know I tend towards a Soviet/Cuba bias, but the only possible way to see this as anything other than the US just being gigantic assholes and bullies (which is still an understatement) is if you adopt fully xenophobic, racist, whatever else views of the non-US world. That's why there's sort of two contradictory (but also not really) paths of domestic US propaganda.
One side focuses on like "we must secure every resource we can and kill everyone who opposes it! 'Might makes right', so let's be mighty!" Hoorah, brother 😎
And the other path is "we don't like killing people. And yeah, sure, the US has made mistakes. Maybe a lot of mistakes! But we have the right intentions and we must continue to strive towards our stated goals. Anyone who opposes us supports [list of every bad thing that the US probably also does]"
You let people take the koolaid that tastes better to them, just as long as they support the military when, say, concentration camp victims get sick of the shit and do something about it.
I guess time will tell, but I do think the amount of people in both groups is dwindling. People are moving further from "hell yeah, fuck around and find out brother" dipshit thinking to "well, we've made mistakes..." and some of those people are moving towards "ok, those weren't mistakes. I was told a lie and willingly believed that my entire life. And now I'm fucking pissed because my government is actually the evil one." I don't want to pretend the furthest group is large, because it's not, but I can see it growing as people are exposed to constant coverage of Palestine. It becomes harder and nearly impossible to think "this is our best ally? We support this without limitation?"
The issue with a movement towards anti-imperialism, anti-war, anti-supporting wars, etc. is it's very en vogue right now. It's been 23 years since that beautiful September day ( ✈️ 🏙️ ). If there's ever another 9/11 style event, and if one doesn't organically happen I can bet infinite money the CIA is working on something for decades now, Americans are gonna do exactly what "liberal Zionists" in Israel did on 10/7. Like a light switch go from "we can work together!" to "I am so sorry, friend. I must nuke you."
But anyway, all that to say, people believe the story they want to make themselves feel good. They never ask why Cuba would want missiles or why the Soviets were involved or even what the Soviet Union was. They don't ask any questions at all.
That's probably the hardest part for me to deal with if I ever discuss these things irl. It's like I can give them an hour long history lesson, and if I'm bothering to do so the person is probably receptive to it, so they go "oh ok." But the next time something happens, perhaps a pipeline is blown up in Europe, "the fucking Russians!" is the immediate response. It's as if all the bad things and lies are in the past and can be seen and acknowledged. The future is just truth and justice and everything good. And the present doesn't exist at all. You close your eyes, and when you open them the future is still bright, and the past of death and lies is longer than ever.
I think they did remove their nuclear ballistic missiles from turkey, but kept regular ballistic missiles. They did forget to remove the Italian nukes, so they could cover all of Europe and the balkans easily in the case of confrontation in Europe.
The scary part is the summary in the article is actually how yanks are taught about it, and all their history in general. It's always some variation of "Our evil enemy tried to do an evil thing, but we stopped them/attempted to stop them, and then everyone clapped."
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Over the years, Moscow’s missteps have rallied support for NATO, prodded Congress toward action against Russia and angered European governments.
While policymakers cannot count on Russian blunders continuing, it’s worth considering the number of unforced errors Moscow has committed over the years and the consequences it has been forced to endure.
Ukraine has thwarted assaults on its largest cities (Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa), recaptured half the land lost at the war’s outset and sunk or damaged a third of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
These outrages helped the West build support for the creation a year later of NATO, a military alliance the USSR despised.
In June 1979 amid fanfare in Moscow, Presidents Leonid Brezhnev and Jimmy Carter signed the SALT II Treaty to limit long-range nuclear arms.
When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, the West had other interests: NATO wanted and gained Russian rail access to supply its forces in Afghanistan, and the U.S. was eager for the 2010 New START Treaty, which reduced both sides’ long-range nuclear arms.
The original article contains 785 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!