W. Niederhut

LOL... Meanwhile, isn't Thomas Massie-- the guy who bought his kids AK-47s for Christmas-- one of Mathew Koch's heroes? GOP Rep. Thomas Massie Reintroduces Bill To ‘Terminate’ Department Of Education (msn.com)

John, Let me help you out with your latest misinterpretation. Lesson # 1-- An ad hominem fallacy is an irrelevant comment attacking the person rather than addressing the substance of their arguments. My pointing out how you have persistently misinterpreted my comments about the U.S. and the Russian Federation (above) is not an ad hominem fallacy per se. I didn't call you an intellectually dishonest Irish peater potter. That would have been an ad hominem fallacy. Instead, I pointed out how you have inaccurately characterized my comments about Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the U.S./NATO response to the invasion.

KRUGMAN: Charting the 40-year history of Republicans' attempts to cut Social Security and Medicarewww.nytimes.com/2023/02/13/opinion/columnists/republicans-medicare-social-security.html February 14, 2023First of all, if Republicans had absolutely no desire to make major cuts to America’s main social insurance programs, why would they sunset them — and thus create the risk that they wouldn’t be renewed? As Biden might say, c’mon, man.And then there’s that historical record. Two things have been true ever since 1980. First, Republicans have tried to make deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare every time they thought there might be a political window of opportunity. Second, on each occasion they’ve done exactly what they’re doing now: claiming that Democrats are engaged in smear tactics when they describe G.O.P. plans using exactly the same words Republicans themselves used.So, about that history. It has been widely forgotten, but soon after taking office Ronald Reagan proposed major cuts to Social Security. But he backed down in the face of a political backlash, leading analysts at the Cato Institute to call for a “Leninist” strategy — their word — creating a coalition ready to exploit a future crisis if and when one arrived.To that end, Cato created the Project on Social Security Privatization, calling for replacing Social Security with individual accounts — which George W. Bush tried to do in 2005. By then, however, Cato had quietly renamed its project; “privatization” polled badly, and Bush insisted that it was a “trick word” used to “scare people.”

I'm responding to Paul Rigby's latest salvo of Kremlin disinformazia in red (below.) Paul Rigby wrote; The pipeline had not been commissioned by Berlin at the time of American demolition, thus it was NOT funding Putin's liberation of the Donbass. You can't even get that obvious fact straight. The "liberation of Donbas," eh, Paul? From what, exactly? The region is part of the internationally recognized, sovereign nation of Ukraine. The Russian Federation signed off on acknowledging Ukrainian sovereignty in Budapest. Meanwhile, what sort of "liberty" exists in Putin's fascist police state nowadays? Do tell. Second, the N2 pipelines were not merely or even primarily a Russian project: Germany wanted them as cheap and abundant gas was the basis of its shift to a greener energy future and the foundation of its economic prosperity. America, in conjunction with self-interested Norwegian quislings, has has now destroyed both. Burning natural gas in a shift to greener energy, eh? That makes about as much sense as your other concepts. Third, Putin isn't committing mass murder of civilians in Ukraine: the most remarkable feature of Russian missile attacks on the dual-use infrastructure of the puppet junta are their precision and thus the small number of civilian casualties. How many Ukrainians has Putin murdered during the past 12 months? Any idea? As for Putin's destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure prior to, and during, the past bitter winter, weren't you and John Cotter just lamenting the plight of Western Europeans deprived of Nordstream natural gas in winter? Do you have similar humanitarian concerns for Ukrainians freezing as a result of Putin's infrastructure demolitions? To the contrary, the appalling casualties among Ukrainian forces are the direct responsibility of Washington, which refused to honour binding agreements (Minsk I & II), continued to direct the bombardment of the Donbass, sabotaged negotiations mediated by Turkey and Israel, and continues to throw ill-armed, forcibly conscripted late middle-aged men into battles they can't win. That's rich. I think we all know which side in this brutal Russian invasion has been most notoriously sending poorly-trained and poorly-equipped conscripts and convicts to their deaths. Fouth, what democracy in Ukraine? There was a US-managed, corrupt, oligarchical Russophobic farce post-coup, predicated upon torture, assassination and blackmail. In short, a standard CIA-controlled nightmare. What an absolute joke. The nightmare is Putin's totalitarian police state. I think we are all capable of discerning the difference between Putin's corrupt puppet, Yanukovych, and Zelensky. Fifth, your history of the US' involvement in inter-war Europe conveniently neglects the massive increase in Wall Street and corporative investment in Germany following Hitler's accession to power; and the continued support of US business for the National Socialist war-machine throughout the period 1941-1945. Hardly the case. I have long been a critic of Prescott Bush, Allen Dulles, and other N-a-z-i financiers and sympathizers in the the 1930s-- including your own Duke of Windsor. Fortunately, FDR helped turn the tide in that debacle.

John, Your persistent reading comprehension problems are duly noted. Apparently, you failed to understand my explicit comments (above) condemning the Machiavellianism of the Neocon/Bush/Cheney administration's "War on Terror," and Nixon's bombing of Cambodia. I can't say it any more clearly. As for your (above) comments about alleged U.S. "terrorism" in the (reported) demolition of the Nordstream pipeline, how many casualties resulted from that act of "terrorism?" And, as Kirk asked, do you believe Nordstream was demolished without NATO acquiescence? Next question. How many Ukrainian civilians have been massacred by Putin during the past year? Any idea? And why are you and Paul Rigby refusing to acknowledge Putin's war crimes in Ukraine?

Ben, I'm guessing that you haven't heard about Trump's precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan in the MAGA-verse.* The MAGA media focused mainly on blaming Joe Biden for Trump's abrupt withdrawal of troops and the resulting collapse of the Afghan Army. The fact that Bush & Cheney's expensive carpet bombing and occupation of Afghanistan was protracted doesn't mean that Trump's abrupt withdrawal after losing the 2020 election wasn't precipitous. See if you can figure that one out. * Trump ordered rapid withdrawal from Afghanistan after election loss (militarytimes.com)

Ben, Trump and Pompeo surrendered to the Taliban at Doha in February of 2020, and Trump insisted on the precipitous withdrawal of almost all U.S. military forces by mid-January of 2021-- prior to Biden's inauguration-- against the advice of his generals. The Afghan Army saw the writing on the wall and commenced surrendering to the Taliban in various regions of the country in 2020. Trump also refused to share military intelligence about Afghanistan ops with Biden's transition team. It was part of Trump's refusal to concede the election. Yet, remarkably, Fox News, Republicans, and the MAGA media have relentlessly blamed our chaotic exodus from Afghanistan on Biden. Biden deserves some blame, but Trump and Pompeo, obviously, set the stage for the debacle. There are some parallels with the smaller scale Bay of Pigs debacle in 1961, occurring at a time when JFK was still in the process of organizing a new Presidential administration. The op had been planned by the Eisenhower and Nixon administration, then blamed on JFK.

Mathew, Is the MAGA media really blaming Biden for this train derailment? Geez... Kind of bizarre, since Biden is the guy who finally signed an infrastructure bill. And who'd have thunk that Elon Musk is now working for Biden? Is that true, or did you read it on Zero Hedge?

Speaking of Elon Musk, he is, evidently, sabotaging the Ukrainian military again. Elon Musk denies Ukrainian military access to Starlink to prevent WWIII - The Jerusalem Post (jpost.com) February 13, 2023

John, I have posted several comments about the Nordstream demolition as an act of war (in which no one was killed.) For example, on page 16 of this lengthy thread, I wrote; My point about Nordstream is that it was a source of funding for Putin's genocidal war in Ukraine. Putin is committing mass murder of civilians in Ukraine with missiles and drones. Is it ethical in this situation to establish a blockade on his military resources and funding? ... Is democracy worth defending? And at what cost? Perhaps Biden and the U.S. military should have left that Nordstream issue up to you Europeans. But we Americans waited too long to intervene against Hitler, and you Europeans paid a high price for our isolationism prior to 1942.

Kirk, George F. Kennan's thesis in his famous monograph, American Diplomacy, was that the U.S. should have been more actively engaged, earlier, in helping Poland, Czechoslovakia, Britain, and France counter the rising threat of N-a-z-i totalitarianism in Europe. America was too "isolationist." Europe paid a price. Where was our terrible American "full spectrum dominance" when Europe really needed it in 1938? By the time the U.S. finally committed troops to fighting the N-a-z-i-s, the Wehrmacht had already occupied most of Europe, and Hitler was bombing cities in the U.K. with V-2 rockets. The obvious threat to Europe at present is Russian Federation totalitarianism, which has been absolutely brutal. The last time I checked, the Russians were bombing cities in Ukraine with missiles and drones. Those who have criticized U.S. engagement in Ukraine here have assiduously avoided any acknowledgement of Putin's war crimes in Ukraine-- attributing criticism of Putin to "racism," "irrationality," and Deep State propaganda, etc. But it is no stretch to say that what we are witnessing in Ukraine is a brutal assault on sovereignty, international law, and democracy by Putin's totalitarian police state. The Russians are even recruiting troops from populations of convicts in Russian prisons. So, the pearl clutching about the U.S./NATO Nordstream sabotage is, in many ways, a criticism of American engagement in helping to defend Europe from militant Russian totalitarianism. Sanctions, embargoes, and economic blockades have long been an aspect of war, haven't they? Should the U.S. have isolated itself from this European catastrophe in Ukraine, as we did from 1938 to 1942, rather than engaging in such outrageous American "full spectrum dominance?"

John, C'mon, man. If you erroneously accuse a logician of being "illogical," should they set the record straight? I can see that you don't really want to educate yourself about the history of former KGB Lt. Col. Vladimir Putin and his totalitarian police state. That history has everything to do with Putin's invasion of Ukraine-- the latest step in his longstanding agenda of re-establishing the former Soviet Union as an FSB-aligned dictatorship. You're also dead wrong in claiming that I have not been a critic of the U.S. military industrial complex-- including the Vietnam War and our phony Neocon "War on Terror" after 9/11. See my (above) comments to Ben on that very subject. I was attacked, as the editor of my school newspaper, for criticizing Nixon's bombing of Cambodia years ago. And I was also attacked in 2003 for criticizing Bush & Cheney's invasion of Iraq. What you fail to understand is that the war crimes of the CIA and U.S. military don't justify the crimes of the KGB/FSB and Russian military. I have been a critic of both. Your irrationality and perverse misinterpretations of my arguments are, indeed, leading nowhere in this "debate" about Putin's horrific invasion of Ukraine.

Pat, As a member of the exiled Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) during the past quarter century, I was privy to some rather shocking things that the general public doesn't know about. These events occurred prior to, during, and after Putin and the FSB seized control of the ROCOR through an internal political coup in 2007. I confess that prior to 2007 I also had a fairly positive opinion of Vladimir Putin, as a judicious leader who had stabilized the Russian Federation after the Yeltsin years. It was only after 2007 that I became aware of Putin's dark side. He wanted to use the ROCOR -- the last remnant of the Russian Orthodox Church that had not been corrupted by the KGB in the 20th century--as a mere outpost for Russian espionage. At the time, he explicitly told ITASS that, "Religion is one of Russia's most important weapons of self defense!" One example of FSB activity in the ROCOR that I only learned about after 2006 was the forcible kidnapping and ouster of our former Chief Hierarch, ROCOR Metropolitan Vitaly, (Ustinov) in New York in 2000. Vitaly's FSB abductors then petitioned for guardianship, on the grounds of mental incompetence, in a case that went all the way to the New York Supreme Court. (They lost the case.) Vitaly had strongly opposed the takeover of the ROCOR by Putin's Moscow Patriarchate. I also know of one other case of a ROCOR bishop who was physically assaulted, threatened, and induced to acquiesce in the MP takeover of the ROCOR. It was a 180 degree flip flop on the issue of ROCOR/MP relations. According to former KGB Lt. Col. Konstantin Preobrazhensky, Putin's seizure of the ROCOR in Western Europe and the U.S. in 2007 was part of a longstanding KGB plot. I posted a review of Prebrazhensky's 2009 book at Amazon.* * KGB/FSB's New Trojan Horse: Americans of Russian Descent: Konstantin Preobrazhensky, Various, Andy Glad Graphic Design: 9780615249087: Amazon.com: Books

Apropos of Premise B (above) Was NATO Expansion Really the Cause of Putin’s Invasion? | American Diplomacy Est 1996 (unc.edu) May 2022

John, At the risk of providing more fodder for another one of Chris B's weird ad hominem Chrissy Fits, let me mention that I was a math and philosophical logic ace in college. Logic is one of my strong suits, and you are misrepresenting my arguments here. It's an odd way to pretend that you are winning a debate. I have already outlined for you guys the basic logical structure of the competing premises on this thread about the primary cause of Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Premise A-- The invasion is the latest step in Putin's longstanding agenda of re-establishing the Soviet Union as a totalitarian, FSB police state. (My opinion.) Premise B-- Putin is a victim of imperialistic U.S./NATO expansion-- i.e., U.S., NATO, and Ukrainian Yahtzees are responsible for Putin's decision to invade and bomb civilians in Ukraine. My comments about right wing Trumpsters-- and, apparently, British Labor Party liberals-- opposing military support for Ukraine are not really relevant to the fundamental debate about Premise A vs. Premise B. Hence, you are misrepresenting my arguments. As for the relationship between Putin's personality and "ruling methods" and his longstanding FSB agenda of re-establishing the Soviet Union, it is the essential thesis of Catherine Belton's analysis in Putin's People. Belton's thesis is that the KGB had anticipated the collapse of the USSR in the 1990s, and that KGB Lt. Col. Putin was a pivotal figure in their longstanding KGB/FSB strategy of re-establishing the Soviet empire as an FSB police state.

John, Your analysis makes no sense. Let me explain why. 1) Trump supporters are authoritarians who have, like Trump, idealized Putin as a fascist strongman. For example, when Putin first invaded Ukraine one year ago, Trump declared that, "Putin is a genius!" Putin has long been a pin up boy for the Trumpsters. So, unlike British liberals, Trump supporters oppose support for Ukraine not because they are pacifists, but because they admire Putin and his quasi-fascist factotum, Donald Trump. 2) Putin's personality and Stalinist/Andropov upbringing are absolutely relevant to his foreign policy-- his agenda of re-establishing the Soviet empire as an imperialist, totalitarian police state. Are you familiar with the histories of Spiridon, Mikhail, and Vlad Putin, Sr.? I would urge you and Paul Rigby to educate yourselves about Putin's 21st century FSB oligarchy by studying Catherine Belton's well-researched history, Putin's People. Also, have you studied the Mitrokhin archives? Solzhenitsyn? Konstantin Preobrazhensky? Set aside the ubiquitous KGB disinformazia in the Western media. Putin and his KGB goons have used it for decades.

Obama's military occupation of Afghanistan, Ben? That's rich. Obama was inaugurated more than 7 years after Bush & Cheney occupied Afghanistan. Did you ever read Robert Gates' memoir on that subject? Gates faulted Obama for dragging his feet on the prosecution of Bush & Cheney's bogus "War on Terror," then reluctantly conceded that "Obama made all of the right calls." Previously, Leon Panetta had advised Obama that, "You can't just say, 'no,' to these guys" ( i.e., the CIA and Joint Chiefs.) JFK was the only POTUS who ever did that, and they shot him in the head. As an anti-war liberal and Obama supporter, I was quite surprised and disappointed by Obama's strange capitulation to the military-industrial complex in the Middle East. As for Putin's Ukrainian debacle, our friends across the pond are, apparently, determined to blame it on Bidenescu, while pretending that Putin is some sort of enlightened autocrat. And, as Americans in the post-Bush/Cheney era, who are we to criticise an imperialist like Putin for invading and bombing a sovereign nation?

They'll have to recruit more convicts.

John, I agree that Craig Murray has written some good stuff about Bush & Cheney's Iraq WMD scam, and their phony Neocon "War on Terror. Murray is a man who has been willing to speak truth to power. I take my hat off to him. I am also surprised to hear about the suppression of Labor Party dissent against support for Ukraine in the U.K. Not o.k. in my book. Here in the states, the opposition to support for Ukraine is coming from far right Trumpsters, including those who tried to obstruct the certification of Biden's election. As for Paul Rigby's bogus, KGB-affiliated "review" of Catherine Belton's book, I would advise people to judge for themselves. And, incidentally, the book has been extensively reviewed at Amazon. Paul has also expressly denied that Russia interfered in our 2016 election on behalf of Trump. He's wrong. And he refers to Biden as, "Bidenescu." Is Paul waiting for Godot, or what, exactly? Some people on this forum are poorly informed, and I daresay naive, about Putin and his FSB. The Russians I know have no illusions about the subject.

Get a clue, Mathew. Helmer is a KGB stooge.

Paul Rigby, Thanks for sharing your bizarre KGB "review" of Catherine Belton's well-documented history of Putin's FSB-aligned oligarchy since 2000-- Putin's People. Do you really not know that your hero, John Helmer, is a KGB-affiliated propagandist in Moscow? https://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Another-Ex-KGB-Spy-Spills-the-Beans-Yuri-B-3041643.php Also, thanks for sharing your bizarre opinion that Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 U.S. election on behalf of Trump. Meanwhile, I'm shocked, shocked to learn that long-time British Moscow correspondent, Catherine Belton, has been a "friend" of the former head of MI6's Russia desk, Christopher Steele. What's the world coming to? Beyond ad hominem KGB pablum, do let us know where Catherine Belton's well-documented history of 21st century Putin-ism gets it wrong. My advice to you is to refrain from posting bogus reviews of books that you haven't read. https://www.amazon.com/Putins-People-Took-Back-Russia/dp/1250787327/ref=sr_1_1?crid=14N4Q0KW7XS1K&keywords=putin's+people+by+catherine+belton&qid=1676137853&sprefix=Putin's+People%2Caps%2C351&sr=8-1

Addendum: As for the JFK/Russia subject, I agree with Maestro Brancato about JFK's admirable efforts to de-escalate the Cold War, but let's recall that JFK also stood up to Russian bullying in the cases of Berlin and the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Chris, I posted a comprehensive rebuttal (above, in red letters) of your confused blather about Nordstream and our U.S./NATO response to Putin's brutal invasion of Ukraine. Your response to my rebuttal was another confused word salad, replete with your usual inaccurate, puerile, ad hominem slurs. It can't be said any more clearly than I said it, (and I know a great deal more about Putin and the modern Russian Federation than you do, based partly on my involvement in the Russian Orthodox Church during the past quarter century.) Did you ever read Catherine Belton's book, Putin's People, as I advised? You and the other Putin apologists on the forum really need to study that book.

Chris, Thanks for tossing out another one of your peculiar, British word salads. We Americans saved you Brits when the Yahtzees were launching V-2 rockets at your cities, and now you think we're the bad guys for helping Ukraine while Putin is launching rockets at their cities, eh? Strange logic.