Popular Comments

Discussion: The NYT Spelling Bee Thread

got the QB. It's been a good week :-)

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

mtierney said:

Meanwhile, back in another NYC courtroom, this is happening…

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/13/nyregion/jury-selection-menendez-trial.html?unlocked_article_code=1.sk0.DT5n.Vti3R1DuVDuJ&smid=url-share

Gold bars were found, concealed into the lining of his suits — really?!

Let everyone know when you find a defense of Menendez in his current legal difficulties by a poster on MOL, or a local Democratic politician, or a NJ Democratic politician, or a national Democratic politician.

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

I did. He's a liar and those who believe him are dupes. Take, for instance, where he talks about WWII -- he conveniently skips over the fact that the war began, not with Germany attacking the USSR, but with the USSR and Germany allied and jointly attacking Poland. In the context of Ukraine, his talking about millions killed very pointedly skips over the millions killed by the USSR.

His speech is full of similar dishonest omissions and misdirections. It's a speech that relies on his audience's ignorance and credulity.

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

To ask it another way: You wouldn’t make each and every one of those concessions, if you had to, in order to save all the lives that have been lost on both sides of the war?

Would you be OK with Russia or China overthrowing our government and installing a puppet?  Do you think it we should just be passive and accept that because someone might get hurt?  How would you feel if your country was taken over for the benefit of another country?

I remember when people thought Trump was a Russian puppet and they were pretty pissed off.  

Absolutely not.  If Russia or China attempted a coup using NGOs and their intelligence agencies, I think the only rational defense would be to invade Canada.

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

Some people delight in constructing paths of breadcrumbs leading backwards from historical events and then proclaiming that said historical event was inevitable.  People float the myth that the Treaty of Versailles was the cause of WW 2 and that FDR knew that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor.  

These arguments about the cause of war in Ukraine are no different.  The reality is that there were many decision points along the trail from 1994 to the present when different decisions could have been made that would have changed history.  The U.S. could have done some things differently.  Putin could have made different decisions.  I reject the argument that the U.S. is unilaterally responsible for the war.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

nan said:

tjohn said:

nan said:

They did not have enough men to take Kyiv.  It was a diversion.  They left as a good will gesture after the peace talks--which then broke down.  Of course western media turned it into huge cinematic deal. 

It's hard to decide which of Nan's ideas are the most bizarre, but this one is up there.

Not as bizarre as Putin thinking he could take the city of Kyiv with the number of troops he had surrounding the city at the time. 

Weren't you the person who suggested we all reference the Institute for the Study of War for "real" information?

Make sure you read the article I posted about their funding and biases. It might just surprise you.

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/russia-ukraine-war-isw/

Considering that the attack on Kyiv, if successful, would very likely have given Putin the quick win he wanted, I don't believe for a minute that it was a unserious diversion.  Secondly, while I can think of many cases of military operations intended to be diversions from main thrust, I am hard-pressed to think of any that were not expected to succeed.

The most obvious explanation for the failure of the attack on Kiev is that it failed for operational reasons - in other words, the Russians didn't have the skills to pull off a large, fast-moving combined arms operation.  And that is not a criticism of Russia, really. Very few armies can manage large operations without a huge amount of practice.  The German Army of WW II is really the only army I can think of that managed large scale operations well from the beginning.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

nan said:

Continued diplomacy is not the same as "don't do it," which is unacceptable.

I am actually skeptical that continued diplomacy would work, since many of the names/groups mentioned had already admitted they were not open to anything like that. This was from a year ago and since then I have heard Jeffrey Sachs complain about the lack of diplomacy for the groups he mentions.

Continued diplomacy, rather than surrender to Nazis, NGOs and border warheads, was always the obvious alternative to “Do it.”

Alas, a military invasion makes diplomacy more difficult. I’m hoping you can understand that without needing to hear it from Jeffrey Sachs first.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

mtierney said:

Question I have is why another Democratic alternative cannot be considered, albeit the November election is looming. Is it really all about Kamala Harris and the prospect of her stepping into —(two scenarios come to mind) —%the role as our  first female president? Her poll numbers have been so consistently poor, she could never win an election on her own merits.

Do you even care?

I think most rational people are wondering why we can't do better than the two fossils we have now, but it seems that it is what it is.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: American Water Homeowner Water Line Protection Program

There are insurance companies that do offer the protection. It is less expensive than Amer Water and provides a dollar amount of insurance to repair the sewer line if if becomes damaged.

My experience with Amer Water protection was mediocre at best. It was with my mother's house which I was managing when she was in memory care.

Sewer starts backing up. So I call. They can't get anyone there for a day or so. As I recall (It was 8 or 9 years ago) they hired different plumbers who made three or four visits. After three visits, they called a plumber who had a scope to video the pipeline. He finds the sewer line is broken into two parts and one section dropped an inch or two lower than the other. This means that the wastewater is leaking into the ground and the water table.

The correct cure would be to dig up the road and replace pipe. They didn't want to pay for that. Somehow, they put a "patch" and the sewer line stopped backing up into the house. 

For all I know, It may still be leaking into the water table.

--- Then I look at my cousin's experience last year. He had no insurance at all and ended up with a $14k bill.

My takeaway: Find and insurance company that offers this coverage. However, potential for this damage is rare so if you can "self-insure," that is an option.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

nan said:

  It is pointless for me to go back and forth with you about why the Russians felt this was an existential threat.

This is true, because your words are meaningless. You'll say that there would have been no war if Minsk was followed and, when pointed out that Minsk addresses none of the things you claim were critical, claim that taking you at your word is nitpicking. You'll claim Russia faced an existential threat, but weave this way and that on what you mean by that. You'll claim you support peace, while bending over backward to justify war.

But maybe you're right about forests and trees. Forget your specific words and claims -- the forest is this -- you believe the United States is a uniquely malign force in our world, and so you support any entity that opposes it. That's your sole criteria. Anything and anyone is justified if it aligns against the CIA-neocon cabal you believe runs things. Anyone and anything is suspect of being in alliance with that cabal if they do not sufficiently oppose it. Everything else is irrelevant details.

Like  2 Likes