domain:arjunpanickssery.substack.com
FtSoA
12hr ago
Don't tell me that tell the Russians that.
But I suspect it's Moldova that has the most to lose from a significant Russian victory in Ukraine.
FtSoA
12hr ago
Why not?
Empirical evidence suggests strongly that it keeps not happening, even by people who claim to want it to happen. Furthermore, the Taiwanese themselves (unlike the Ukrainians) are pretty lackluster in their own efforts to build up deterrence to China.
My guess is that it's a foregone conclusion that Taiwan will be absorbed by China in the coming years, similar to Hong Kong, due to everyone recognizing the inevitable and Taiwan and the US being unwilling to go to war over it once China decides to exert significant pressure. Possibly, a future US administration that was very hardline on China might change that calculus, but both parties are pretty antiwar these days.
But if the US has budget X and they can split it between the Pacific and Europe, or just spend it on the Pacific, the latter option is scarier for China
Don't confuse stocks and flows.
That ship has already sailed. The US has been conducting "non-kinetic" military operations in support of Ukraine's war effort for the duration of the war.
We are not, in any meaningful sense of the term, "bogged down" in Ukraine. Notably, our US Navy ships have not sailed to pressure Russia in any significant form (as we did re: Iran). Also, ships can change course if ordered to redirect. As could any of the other military assets in the region. They aren't being permanently committed or destroyed. (Note that we always have some level of military presence countering Russia and conducting ISR.)
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
12hr ago
“George E Hale describes Mottezians” could be a regular segment.
More interesting than bare links, at least.
ABigGuy4U
12hr ago
Yes probably, when I say freezing the conflict I was being a bit unclear. I’m including solutions like giving away the eastern half and making the remaining rump swear neutrality, not just a Korea style freeze. Anything that could stop the conflict without getting Poland encircled.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
12hr ago
Tall, taller than I am. Cropped hair, clean shaven, I don't think you're Canadian but I imagine you posting from Canada anyway. Enjoyer of spectator sports, smoke an occasional cigar, sometimes drinking beer when posting. This is all probably stupidly innacurate to realty.
birb_cromble
12hr ago
If that's the case, then isn't ISW admitting Russian advances an even stronger signal of accelerated Russian gains?
orangecat
12hr ago
This whole thing has not been fact checked and is based on one anonymous source... That's enough for you to consider me a nonhuman?
You think you have the moral high ground here?
ThisIsSin
Liberty has an anti-privilege bias
12hr ago
Large parts of the right now won't accept being shamed full stop, by either side. They won't be shamed by the left.
What has accepting being shamed by "the left" brought them?
It hasn't bought them economic prosperity, it hasn't bought them moral prosperity.
The problem with shame is that you can always just say "no" if you're willing and powerful enough to do so. The "right" has regained that power, for the "left" emptied their stores of social credit on wasteful social investments that ultimately failed to pay off/legitimize themselves.
No_one
12hr ago
Russians wouldn't settle for 'freezing the conflict', they're not idiots. They're going to demand neutrality or keep fighting.
They have said that over and over.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
12hr ago
Large parts of the right now won't accept being shamed full stop, by either side.
Why is this a problem?
Trump has identified accepting shame of any kind as weakness
No, events have demonstrated that accepting shame is weakness. Both Smollett and Floyd demonstrate this -- the totally fake Smollett incident got Congress to pass a hate crime law, and the shame about the killing of Floyd resulted in shamefaced politicians dialing back on enforcement of basic laws against real crimes.
They are then welcome to e.g. turn the tables and say it's the left who should be really ashamed for not taking immigration seriously in the first place.
That doesn't work, the left simply sneers at the idea that they could do anything shameful or that the right has any standing to shame them. As I said, it had become an asymmetric weapon, and the breaking of it was necessary.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
12hr ago
I've no idea what anyone looks like either I just get a mental image reading people's posts, which firms up the more of their posts that I read. There are some posters here where I can't see anything at all, for various reasons.
Edit: You wear steelframed high quality eyeglasses in my mind's eye. German-made, of course.
No_one
12hr ago
Please be serious. Where Putin puts his forces after taking out Ukraine is the concern.
There's nothing valuable in the Baltics whatsoever. Nothing at all. The population would mostly flee and be happily snapped up by European union which needs wagies. Baltic sea navigation wouldn't be improved, actually seizing the Baltic state could possibly make western Europe close the Danish straits.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
12hr ago
Male, early 30s, knitted brow, dark brown hair that sticks up. Heavy framed glasses. Green on March 17. You are surrounded by a yellow aura which belies your vociferous demeanor.
No_one
12hr ago
It's not about budgets.
US doesn't have the industrial capacity to counter China. The US war plan, right now, relies on a hail mary of "maybe if we spam 1000 improved Tomahawk missiles at (mobile) Chinese batteries from submarines off the coast we'll be able to kill enough of these to be able to operate carriers near Taiwan.
Mind you US Tomahawk inventory is about 1k. (Or 2k) I dunno, but in any case only a fraction can even hit mobile targets even theoretically and assuming, during a war that US would be able to observe China unmolested by laser satellite dazzlers is brave in itself.
No_one
12hr ago
especially when we've been able to help hold back Russian forces for this long while barely even lifting a pinky
Incredible viewpoint. I'd advise never speaking in that manner to Ukrainians because they're going to be justifiably somewhat bitter about the half-million people who died BECAUSE Americans assured Ukraine they could help them defeat Russia.
No_one
13hr ago
ISW is considered mostly a joke by people who aren't pro-Ukrainian. Nakedly partisan, not that smart. E.g. they said this about the failed Ukrainian summer offensive.
Putin may have ordered the Russian military command to hold all Russia’s initial defensive positions to create the illusion that Ukrainian counteroffensives have not achieved any tactical or operational effects despite substantial Western support.
TIRM
13hr ago
If he's willing to move to and live in a system, then he gets to use "us" and "our" statements. He's walking the walk, so he gets to talk the talk.
The erosion of shame as a social force is one of the biggest impacts of the Trump presidencies.
Shame comes with fiduciary responsibilities: it is the interest paid on a positive balance of social credit.
When the faction[1] stewarding the account runs out of social credit, or the social interest rate drops to 0 or (worse) goes negative, shame disappears. Wrong but aesthetically pleasing policies decrease this balance, like rioting, defending illegal migration, and hysteria over an uncommon cold- the trick is to limit your imposition of shame to the interest only so you don't run out of it. A virtuous people can do this, but being too focused on your social credit balance compromises you in other ways.
A minimum level of shame (and interest) is required to enforce message discipline. Once you stop having that, you stop being able to generate interest entirely, and the opportunity for rival investors appears to take over stewardship of the account- once the interest rate rises, they're locked in until they overspend or the bottom falls out of the social economy again.
This is now what has happened- the right overspent hard from 2016-2024, and now the left is hunting the right's institutions of social capital generation (academia, etc.)
they are storing it up to be brought down on their asses in much larger quantities later
I disagree. If the left/classical liberals can deliver on its promises- that fixing the abuses of right-wing/progressive privilege will make things better- then the left will start generating social capital [and thus shame] for itself and transition back into being right-wing. The 'first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win' cycle typifies this- social credit holders always eventually go bankrupt, and this happens slowly, then suddenly.
Elon Musk's claim that empathy is the most dangerous force in society would be the peak example of this phenomenon.
Elon Musk is a liberal (definitionally, but not popularly, left-wing), so he doesn't believe the right should be allowed to accrue any social credit because when they do, the typical abuses happen. Left-wing thought has the opposite problem in that, when the economy switches from a positive-sum to a zero-sum mode, it failed to store up social credit and gives way to whoever the right-wing is at the time; this is why classical liberalism ultimately died in the '80s, and part of why it has returned now.
[1] Right-wing thought is defined by the desire to keep a balance higher than what market conditions otherwise dictate; or in other words, the dominant faction that's seeking to increase and wield a balance in this way is by definition right-wing. (This is currently Progressives- the people who call themselves left-wing- so it's very confusing.) This is also, by definition, why the left "always wins" (Progressives simply believe that calling themselves "the left" means they should always win, but winning ain't a left-wing idea and "correct" isn't a real political identity.)
I don't care about the ban, I'm just saying, I don't think that word means what you think it means.
TIRM
13hr ago
granted political asylum in the US in 1987 after being tortured under the regime of the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet
So he's probably a communist fleeing anti-communists backed by the US. Then let into the US. "This poor cobra is being oppressed by the mongoose. Quick, let him shelter in our home to keep him safe."
I thought the rules were communists don't count and should not be let in. Googling a bit, the specific immigration policies reference party membership. I suppose this guy was not a communist party member since that was illegal in Chile in 1987. Maybe he was technically eligible for entry only because he couldn't officially join a party matching his ideology. I'm getting more and more skeptical of political asylum. It seems to be misapplied.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
13hr ago
To me this thread, from start to finish, is the Britta/Chang plot of the UN episode of Community. But I got here too late to break out my globe and red paint.
Rosencrantz2
13hr ago
The erosion of shame as an asymmetric weapon is one of the biggest impacts of the Trump presidency; the right will no longer accept being shamed.
This is the problem though. Large parts of the right now won't accept being shamed full stop, by either side. They won't be shamed by the left. And they won't shame themselves. Trump has identified accepting shame of any kind as weakness; I suspect it would be soul death for him to think of himself as having done something wrong or acknowledge contrition. With the regulation that shame provides gone from both directions, nothing can stop awful things being happily written off as costs worth paying in the name of a bigger cause such as lowering immigration.
To my mind a wise right wing person would accept shame for something like this story, if true. They are then welcome to e.g. turn the tables and say it's the left who should be really ashamed for not taking immigration seriously in the first place. That'd be a stronger response, one that keeps shame in play, versus claiming oneself to have moved beyond shame altogether.
In this case, I think foreigners are probably right to describe the British justice system as their own, because it seems to serve them more than it does the British.
More options
Context Copy link