Secret CIA source claims Russia rigged 2016 election

NATO is, and alway has been, as much if not more a political tool as an actual military alliance. The military part of NATO, during the Cold War, always had an air of the theoretical about it, because there was no way to really be sure what would happen if the balloon went up. In fact, I’d argue that the general feeling was that if NATO had to actually fight the Warsaw Pact, it would have failed in its mission of deterrence. No one knew exactly which way the various nations of NATO would actually jump if push came to shove, and while exercises and training could shed some light on expected capabilities in the field, the political battlefield remained terra incognita. I think it’s pretty clear that everyone on either side of the inter-German border was pretty happy they never had to find out; there were doubts even on the other side about some members of the Pact.

But one thing NATO absolutely did, and continues to do, is restrict European military action to stuff that can be widely agreed on, and which can gain support from the USA. It also channels European military spending and R&D and planning into areas supporting multilateral approaches to the use of force. It has prevented and continues to limit the desire or ability of individual European nations to “go rogue” as it were and develop independent military policies and systems that would feed in, inevitably, to independent foreign policies which in turn would have the danger of reigniting the sorts of internecine struggles that wracked Europe for centuries. Now, nationalists in European countries may well find these limits distasteful, but it seems most Europeans understand the huge benefits NATO has given them, in terms of limiting expenditures on defense, limiting exposure in terms of foreign policy consequences, and frankly protecting them from each other.

Take away NATO, especially now after Brexit and the demise of any hope that the EU could develop into a real sovereignty and thus take over the collective military responsibility of Europe, and what do you have? The near-inevitability of the stronger states like Germany and France forging their own military and security paths that I rather doubt would result in more stability; quite the contrary. Hell, France even after withdrawing formally from NATO’s military command structure continued to play a de facto role in the defense of Europe, and for most practical purposes went along with the gist of things; their return recently to the fold underscores the utility of the alliance as seen even by its most cantankerous members.

To think of NATO as purely a single-purpose military entity whose purpose evaporated with the end of the USSR is, I think, short sighted, and erroneous.

Putin has got to be trolling us now.

It’s all win for Putin.

Putin: I must defend my good friend Donald Trump. Why such a wealthy man hire prostitutes? That would be sad and pathetic!

Trump: Listen, Vladimir …

Putin: Don’t people realize that merely mentioning a world leader in connection with prostitutes is demeaning? It diminishes him. It brings a powerful man down to the level of a common - what is the word? - john.

Trump: I know you’re trying to help, but could you maybe … help less?

Putin: I don’t understand, Donald. I am just trying to use my world-wide platform to tell people that the idea you paid for prostitutes on the night of November 9 2013 with your Amex Titanium card, security code 728, is of course, absurd!

Trump: I know, but I’m not sure this is conveying the right message…

Putin: Very well, Donald. But if you ever need me to tell the world that mentioning Donald Trump and prostitutes together in public is a terrible thing, you can rely on me.

(Post-satire world disclaimer: this conversation did not actually happen, at least as far as I know.)

Of course not; Donald is forced to use a translator when talking to daddy. Putin does not deign to speak to his pets in their vulgar native tongue.

I don’t think Putin trolling will work much longer, people will learn to ignore him.

Ignore all that ammunition to use against Trump? Why would they want to do that.

“Did Trump really come and meet with Moscow prostitutes? Firstly he is an adult, and secondly he is a person who for many years has organized a beauty pageant, socialized with the most beautiful women in the world. It is hard to believe that he ran to a hotel to meet with our girls of a low social class, although they are the best in the world,” Putin said.

wink, wink

[quote=“BadSport, post:615, topic:127454, full:true”]
The simple explanation is usually the best, which is Russia interfered with an election in order to support a candidate they felt would serve their interests. Trump accepted it because it worked in his favour, and he is soft on Russia, and appears to have some advisors who have connections there.

To go beyond that is just speculation. [/quote]

I’m not sure why you (and Trump supporters) don’t seem to understand that there is NO NEED to go beyond that. If you admit to these simple facts :
-Russia interfered with a U.S. election, influencing the outcome
-A candidate for U.S. President had knowledge of this interference and benefitted from it
-The same candidate had campaign advisors and financial backers who would directly benefit from a relaxing of the sanctions on Russia

No further speculation required! No pee-pee party tapes needed! No Manchurian Candidate conspiracy needed! Just the basic facts are enough to create a conflict of interest and ethical failing that should, in any previous election year, result in investigation and eventually impeachment.

Putin uses Trump to attack western democracies. Putin is a troll and must be ignored, then deal with.

In another country this might mean something. In this country, it means nothing.

Speaking of Wikileaks related things…

Time to get the popcorn and watch the GOP spin. It’ll be some glorious cognitive dissonance.

Holy crap. That’s surprising. I didn’t think Manning would get out before at least 20 years had passed.

Wow. Wonder if there’s any chance for Snowden.

Holy cow.

From the article:

This almost seems more like a humanitarian commutation than anything else.

I do believe he needs to pardon Snowden however. What Snowden did may have been more damaging to US interests, but was infinitely more valuable to ultimately supporting the US Constitution and a far greater public service, IMHO. What Snowden did was the ultimate in whistleblowing, and the fact that he’s still a fugitive from justice is testament to how far gone those intelligence agencies are.

Assange is banking on Trump doing nothing because Putin owns him.

I do not at all agree with commuting Manning’s sentence. Manning committed the crime.

I tend to agree.

Snowden did what he did for love of country. He kept a lot of things hidden.
Manning did it because he could? Just a giant info dump of crap with no regard to the damage it would cause.

That said, Manning’s treatment has been pretty fucking horrible, so if it was done for that reason I kind of get it.

Good news. Thanks Obama :D

Yes, Manning committed the crime.

So it’s worth point out the difference between a pardon and a commutation. A pardon erases the conviction, whereas a commutation keeps the conviction but decreases the penalty.

What magnet said about a commutation vs. a pardon. Very different thing.

Wherever Snowden may have started, he’s ended up under Putin’s protection. I don’t see how Obama pardons him in the current environment (and I can actually see Trump doing it, specifically to piss the IC off.)