Jump to content

JohnOsbourne

Members
  • Posts

    1,965
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Location
    The Darkest Depths of Mordor

Recent Profile Visitors

5,470 profile views
  1. Very cool. Chicago excepted it seems that Page was in pretty decent shape in April that year. Hard to tell from the awful audience recording, but my impression is that his playing here was very fluid by '77 standards.
  2. The point being, the US Government is acting irrationally in light of its own interests here.
  3. No, it's completely irrelevant. Ukraine is free to seek out whatever alliances it wants, but the US is under no obligation to grant them their wishes. There is NO legitimate American interest that requires having a military alliance with the Ukraine. What do you think the US would do if China tried to form a military alliance with Mexico? What did the US do during the Cuban missile crisis? "You support "imperial stability"???" No, I love the old American Republic and I despise the American Empire.
  4. The original strike force was WAY too small to take a city of Kiev's size. The Russians clearly thought that after a show of force, Zelensky's government would wise up and get serious about negotiating Russia's concerns, and in fact they were until (as is well known) MI-6 sent in their stooge BoJo (you'd think someone as corrupt as he is could afford a goddamn comb) to tell the midget coke fiend that the US-UK was going to fight to the last Ukrainian. I think everyone (Russia, China, ordinary Americans, etc.) is shocked at how completely bat-shit crazy the US Imperium has gone over all of this. So, their operation necessarily evolved. But there is no evidence that Russia ever wanted complete control of the entire territory of Ukraine. As they've stated for a long time, they would not accept a US military satellite on their border with Ukraine (i.e. NATO) and the rights of the Russian-speaking majority in the east (who wants nothing to do with Kiev) had to be respected. I.e. the aims were strictly limited. In fact, it's the US that has created an open-ended war that threatens Imperial stability. They can pour all kinds of weapons into the Ukraine (thus enriching the MIC), but unless they can do voodoo, they're not gonna summon an army of dead soldiers to use them (the Ukraine is rapidly running out of men to press-gang, it will be funny if they start rounding up women). And they need to control Russia's resources before they can fight China (their ultimate goal). Throw in the third front in the ME (which is clearly going so well, a fleet of cheap drones is scaring off expensive warships), and the GAE is truly fucked.
  5. Pyrrhic in what way? The Russian economy is as strong as ever, the sanctions have completely backfired (unless of course it was America's intention to destroy Europe's economy, which can't be ruled out). Even if the US/EU continues sending weapons (and there is clear domestic resistance on doing this endlessly), they can't send more soldiers (unless the EU deports back refugees or Kiev starts drafting women, which would actually be hilarious). Russia's real geopolitical problem here is that they will now be China's junior partner when the US Empire falls.
  6. No. In fact, I'd say it's completely delusional to think that Russia isn't obviously winning. In fact, they've exceeded all of their pre-war aims. They control 1/5 of Ukraine's territory. They control more than their pre-war objectives and are well-situated to take even more if they want. (They've basically made clear that Poland can have Galicia if they just get sensible.) Ukraine has lost half its population (mainly from people leaving) and has to resort to appalling impressment campaigns just to get teenage and elderly conscripts for the meat grinder. The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is 43. Ukraine is finished as a military force and won't be joining NATO. (Despite massive support from the US and EU, the Ukrainian army is arguably in worse shape than the Wehrmacht in 1945, which was after 4+ years of fighting the entire world.) This is a war of attrition in which Russia clearly has the upper hand, barring American entry (which isn't gonna happen). This says nothing of the shocking geopolitical developments, which have greatly strengthened China and gutted German industrial capacity and generally put the US Empire on shaky ground. The real issue isn't whether Russia is winning, but rather how badly the US is losing.
  7. Wow, end of an era. Very sad, but thanks for the resources, it will be missed.
  8. Completely agree, it's good, unapologetic bluesy hard rock. I still listen to it fairly frequently, unlike say The Firm which did not age well IMO. Definitely Page's best output post-Zep.
  9. Jimmy looks very healthy by '77 standards.
  10. A full recording of the 27th (I'd settle for a decent AUD) is one of my Holy Grails.
  11. The fact that the Pentagon is the only source of information about these things should tell you all you need to know. I'll say it again: it's appalling that so many people who believe the Pentagon is covering up the existence of UFOs also refuse to believe that the US Government could push a poisonous vaccine or lie about any other issue.
  12. It should not, but the reality is, it is dependent, and the US is in absolutely no position to be lecturing other countries about their interests.
  13. What? NATO IS attacking Russia, what's insane is to think otherwise. Obviously, the point is why the US entered into a security arrangement with them in the first place. No national interest depends on it, and it's simply delusional to think the US is a noble force for good in the world. If so, then you really have no other argument and you've conceded the central point. If Mexico's sovereignty is contingent on what the US deems as critical to American interests, then there is no basis for losing your shit over Russia vis-a-vis the Ukraine. Unless of course, all the moralistic bluster is just cover for US imperial expansion.
  14. Obviously, Ukraine as such posed no threat to Russia, it was Ukraine as a NATO member - and hence US proxy state - that posed a threat. As Steve pointed out, that fear has been justifiably borne out by the US/EU determination to fight to the last Ukrainian. Let me ask: how is the Russian position here any different from what the US would do if China tried to form a military alliance with Mexico? It is completely irrelevant what the Ukraine or Baltics "want". The US is under no obligation to provide these (largely fake) countries any kind of security guarantees. Again, what US interest depends on having a military alliance with ex-Soviet entities? BTW, if these countries want democracy, then they want their children to be sexualized. That is the clear pattern in the West. And don't kid yourself: after these recent French riots and the "democratic" response to them (Macron blamed social media and called for censorship), I'm sure a lot of western Europeans are rethinking the entire liberal project.
×
×
  • Create New...