Thursday, August 25, 2022

Sending Bombs Instead Of Diplomats

 ... will condemn many in Africa to death. Dig this.

And this.

This is a direct result of our idiotic obsession with that 2-bit loser, Putin. UKR v RUS is a bum fight, plain and simple. Both countries are corrupt and degenerate. Both countries are experiencing population decline as their women aren't having babies and their life expectancies are static, at best. The war was never going to result in anything but a grinding stalemate as neither side has sufficient infantry to capture big chunks of territory. Finally, there's little to choose between them as they're both ruled by corrupt oligarchs.

We could have sent in diplomats and negotiated a peace that would have allowed the fuel, food and fertilizer to continue to flow to the rest of the world. Instead, our own criminally ignorant and amoral Elites indulged in their post-Trump, psychotic obsession with Vladimir Putin and sent bombs instead. We've turned what should have been one of the last, pathetic adventures of two, dying, sclerotic countries into a worldwide holocaust of famine.

Here, some retired, well-fed general points at dots on a map a bazillion miles away from us. The dots haven't appreciably changed positions in months, but the news media still reports on it like it's the Wehrmacht overrunning France.

Meanwhile, my friend in Malawi, Father Nyoka, prepares for a famine.


tim eisele said...

So, just out of curiosity, I used the search box on your blog to see what you have said about diplomats and diplomacy in the past.

You didn't use either term much. But, it does not appear that you ever had anything positive to say about diplomacy before. Except for a couple of times when you used "diplomacy" as a euphemism for directly sending in the military.

So what happened? Why do you think diplomats would have done any good here, when it doesn't look like you ever thought that they did any good before?

Personally, I am not sure what "diplomats" would have been able to accomplish between Russia and Ukraine, anyway. Russia wants to annex Ukraine. Ukraine doesn't want to be annexed. It doesn't look like there is a whole lot of scope for compromise, here.

K T Cat said...

I've changed my thinking on this since I started the blog. I used to be all about "MOAR BOMBS! MOAR!" Not so much any more. I'm not sure why, but I think I'm looking at things much more on a case-by-case basis.

I'm not as critical of the Afghan and Iraq interventions as some. I don't think we really knew which way the Muslim countries would go if you offered democracy and a modern economy. Hindsight is always superior and it's now obvious that Islam trumps everything else. They aren't solving political or economic equations, but religious ones.

As for UKR-RUS, that's a no-brainer for me. This outcome was obvious from the start. For me, it's another indictment of our education system when our leadership class can't figure out that 150,000 or so troops were not only never going to conquer UKR completely, but even if they did, there was no way an exhausted RUS could go any farther. Weighing that against millions possibly dying in Africa from famine and sending the criminals in UKR bombs to drag out a pointless war against the criminals in RUS made absolutely zero sense.

K T Cat said...

As for a diplomatic solution to the current war, I have no doubt that Trump would have found one. For all of his faults, he knew how to stroke the egos of tyrants and get them to bend at least a little bit. By sending bombs to UKR and telling Zelensky we've got his back, we've done nothing but eliminate the possibility of compromise. It's now a Slavic death match and those things never end well.