Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Fake-est of Fake News
The fake-est of fake news stories is that V. Putin wanted Trump to be prez and therefore used his ‘Boris Badinov’ skills to damage HRC. Russia is Saudi Arabia without the flowing robes. They are the world’s largest energy producer. Every other ‘news’ story on “Russia Today” (their slick news network/propaganda arm, broadcast globally) is about the evils of fracking in the U.S, in an attempt to discourage this practice of exploiting our own energy resources, and to discourage populations in Europe and other viewing countries from doing the same.
Russia’s power rests with being a player in the global energy sector and if we’re stupid enough to demonize carbon based fuels and reduce production, all the better for them. They are not afraid to use the energy ‘weapon’ as they’ve demonstrated in the past when they threatened to cut off supplies to Ukraine during a very cold and deadly winter. Many European countries are very dependent on Russia for energy and the deal done by Chancellor Merkel to allow expansion of the North Steam pipeline which goes entirely through Russian controlled territory will only increase this dependancy. The more energy in the pipeline-pun intended- the lower the price for Russia’s No. 1 export. The last thing Putin wanted was for Alpha Male Trump to be prez-elect. Look at his picks- Tillerman from Exxon to be Sec State, Perry from Texas to be Sec Energy. Look at Trump’s rhetoric on the Dakota access pipeline. A Trump presidency means carbon based energy-friendly policies. In no way is this in Russia’s interest.
And I haven’t even had to mentioned the likelihood that HRC’s rogue server meant that potentially damaging information was in the hands of adversarial nations and theoretically could have been used at some point in the future to damage her presidency, had she won, thus making her the more attractive president from our adversaries viewpoint..
Published in General
This gets overlooked by the followers of the Queen.
Democrats care about nothing but power. Anyone following them agrees or is a useful idiot.
I’ve not heard this line, which should be an obvious point to make, from a single talking head nor from our president elect nor his staff. Why?
I’ve been making the point for a while. It isn’t just the Russians, it isn’t just the Chinese, it is every single intelligence agency in the world worthy of the name. Nothing that was on that server can be considered secure.
I still like to bring up one thing that Scott Adams pondered some months ago: There actually is 1 important reason for Puting preferring Trump over Hillary. Hillary is an unstable, corrupt, incompetent, known interventionist. She is the Kaiser Wilhelm II of the early 21st century, fond of wagging US power around without discrimination or plan, and that could well get entire nations stumbling into a war they never wanted and were not prepared to fight. Therefore, even if Trump means major pushback on Russian energy, it at least won’t mean a war that Putin is in no shape to fight.
Bravo, Melissa. Upvoted.
To Skipsul, I beg to differ with your analysis–your quote:
“Therefore, even if Trump means major pushback on Russian energy, it at least won’t mean a war that Putin is in no shape to fight.”
You mean like that Syrian intervention, of which HRC was the architect, resulting in Russia gaining a military presence in the Middle East never accomplished during the USSR era? That sort of war that Putin is in no shape to fight? Again, during the election, HRC called for a no-fly zone over Syria, to which one wag replied, “There already is one…run by Russia.”
Further, here’s an interesting article on Russia’s performance in Syria:
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/03/09/syria-russia-military-might-surprises-west.html–
Take with a grain of salt as it’s written by a Russian based analyst but if the leak is true, it’s interesting:
“But the demonstration of Russia’s military capabilities in Syria has come as a shock.
A just published confidential NATO analytical report on the issue has admitted Russia’s superiority over the Alliance’s forces and has praised Moscow for the «accuracy and efficiency» of its air strikes.
According to the information obtained by German Focus magazine, the Russian Aerospace Forces operations are much more effective than NATO air strikes, despite the Alliance’s numerical superiority.”
Next?
Indeed. So true.
Unbelievably irresponsible, on her part and that of everyone who knew about it and did nothing.
I would expect that to be about the limits of what Russia can do at the moment. I mean, even the carrier they so flamboyantly sent I think had to be towed at least part of the way.
I do agree, though, that Hillary’s bumbling there allowed Putin into Syria in the first place. But her call for a no fly zone was daft in its nature and could provoke something worse. It’s the problem of a half-baked intervention – no clear goals, limits, missions. The vagueness of it is the problem. Sure, Putin took advantage of an open opportunity, and doubtless Hillary would have opened a few more besides, but her erratic responses to such would have had a high level of risk.
Well, as you say, the source is questionable. But NATO forces have to operate within proscribed limits, while Russia is working directly with Assad under no such limits. They’re hamstrung.
Absolutely – I’m guessing there were hundreds of people that knew about this…and did nothing.
What I wouldn’t give for someone who really understood trade and the Russians.
“That’s a cute little commodity-based economy you got there, Vlad. Be a pity if something was to … happen to it.”
This makes perfect sense. It should be shouted from the rooftops.
A grain of salt? I’ll take the whole 5 lb bag. Strategic Culture is a Kremlin-backed propaganda news site directed toward Western audiences.
Again, I say, if the leak is true, then it doesn’t matter where it appeared.
One of the “support vessels” they send with the Admiral Kuznetsov is usually an ocean-going tug so it can get home okay. It has a ski-jump style bow because there’s no catapult-assisted launch capability on the Kuznetsov either. Because there’s no catapult, neither the MiG-29KR nor the Su-33 are believed to be able to take off with full combat loads (they have to leave some bombs behind). One of the MiGs crashed recently because it ran out of fuel waiting for the crew on the Kuznetsov to replace a fouled arresting cable. That one plane represents 7% of the total inventory for that aircraft type. They lost an Su-33 because of a failed arresting cable too. (Details here.)
Kuznetsov’s water problems aren’t limited to getting from one side of some to the other by itself. The water system onboard sucks. It freezes when the weather gets cold — definitely an issue when it is closer to home. To limit having water pipes burst due to freezing, a lot of the heads are shut down.
That makes no sense. It’s not a “leak” if it doesn’t go first to reputable outlets. Propaganda sites are not places where one expects to find anything but…propaganda (a.k.a. “fake news”). If it is true, its credibility has started out weak.
To your original point, I really don’t think the Kremlin had any particular preference for either candidate, only that the victor took office in a weakened position, and that public confidence in our electoral system is weakened. We mistakenly believe that they are focused on the short term, when in fact they are two or three steps ahead of us.
To Erazoner–
Re your comment on the publication of the leak being creditable/un-creditable I have two words: Blue Dress.
I totally agree with you that they are playing chess to our checkers on all platforms, which is why we’ve been so outclassed on the military platform in Syria. Putin had the weaker hand but has played it brilliantly. Yes, he had to rely on reflagged older Turkish cargo vessels for logistic support, but Russia, like the U.S. has true expeditionary capacity and is prepared to use it boldly in the first instance, while we have dribbled, made vacuous statements like, “ASSAD MUST GO”, backed up by nothing or in Ukraine where our initial support consisted of MRE’S.
No argument there. What they lack in military prowess is made up in intelligence acuity, strategic planning, deception, disinformation, and propaganda. Our intelligence establishment was effectively fooled during the Cold War, while those of us who met them face to face wondered where these bizarre analyses were coming from. At the end of the Cold War, some in the establishment finally realized how effectively they were deceived. Yet 20 years later, all those Soviet experts have left the agencies, to be replaced with people even less capable and more easily deceived than before. As a result, Putin runs rings around Obama and members of select committees in Congress, including the leadership. They have learned from experience, while we ignore the past and fail to peer beyond the immediate horizon.