Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Germany will be crucial in ending Russian invasion of Ukraine. Yeah, like that worked so well the last time   ( nytimes.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Ukraine, Russians, Vladimir Putin, Peterson Institute for International Economics, German Chancellor, invasions, Russian President, Mikhail Khodorkovsky  
•       •       •

2877 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Mar 2014 at 6:35 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-03-04 09:09:40 AM  
Meanwhile, Poland is standing to the side saying, 'Don't mind us.'
 
2014-03-04 09:17:18 AM  

T-Servo: hinten: Gerhard Schroeder

Funny you should mention him- this just came off the wires.


He was already on the board of Gazprom right after he left his chancellorship. Here is what a US Representative had to say about his move back then:

"I referred to him as a political prostitute, now that he's taking big checks from (Russian President Vladimir) Putin. But the sex workers in my district objected, so I will no longer use that phrase," Lantos said.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-13-2870151492 _x .htm
 
2014-03-04 09:24:13 AM  

vpb: Albinoman: Well, nobody understands the policy of appeasement like Germany. Russia took a chunk of Georgia, why not Ukraine too?

I love how everything involving foreign policy is "appeasement".  How many wars would we have had by not if we fought every time some right winger started talking about "appeasement"?


Even if they did have a clue what they're talking about....

Chris: I want to do a little history check on you---what did Neville Chamberlain do wrong in 1939? What did he do wrong?
Kevin: It all goes back to appeasement. It's the key term.
Chris: No, what did he do, tell me what he did?
Kevin: It's the key term.
Chris: You have to answer this question. What did he do?
Kevin: It's the same thing, it puts it all...
Chris: Well tell me what he did?
Kevin: It's appeasement.
Chris: What did Chamberlain do wrong..
Kevin: His actions, his actions enabled, energized, legitimized
Chris: What did Chamberlain do?
Kevin: It's the exact same thing.
Chris: No stop, Kevin. I'm not going to continue with this interview unless you answer what that thing is. What did Chamberlain do in '39, tell me? '38?
Kevin: Chris, it's the exact same thing alright?
Chris: What did he do? <Yelling> What did he do!
Kevin: '38, '39 Chris what year do you want?
Chris: What did he do?
I want you to answer, what did Chamberlain?
He's talking, He's talking about appeasement.
Chris: What did Chamberlain do, just tell me what he did, Kevin? What did Chamberlain do that you didn't like?
Kevin: What, what Chamberlain did? <confused> What, what, the President was talking about, you just said the President was talking about Barack. Look...
Chris: You're making a reference to the days before our involvement in WWII. When the war in Europe began. I want you to tell me as an expert, what did Chamberlain do wrong.
Kevin: You're not going to box me in here, Chris. President Bush was making that. I'm glad, I'm glad.
Chris: You don't know, do you? You don't know what Neville Chamberlain did
Kevin: Yeah, he was an appeaser, Chris....
Chris: You are BS'ing me... You don't know what you're talking about.

http://crooksandliars.com/2008/05/15/matthews-rips-right-wing-talkie -k evin-james-because-he-doesnt-know-neville-chamberlain
 
2014-03-04 09:26:44 AM  

rnatalie: Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
But that couldn't happen again.
We taught them a lesson in 1918,
and they haven't bothered us much at all since then.


The funny part though is that the song criticizes the US more so than the European countries.
 
2014-03-04 09:27:35 AM  

lack of warmth: Meanwhile, Poland is standing to the side saying, 'Don't mind us.'


Nope.  Poland seems to be doing everything they can to get people involved.
 
2014-03-04 09:35:56 AM  
Doesn't matter, Russian financial markets have already tanked more than 100B, their central bank is struggling to keep their currency from collapsing as foreign investors bail on it, and polling indicates that barely 1/4 of Russians support going into the Ukraine. Putin dun goofed, the consequences will never be the same.
 
2014-03-04 09:43:47 AM  

hinten: rnatalie: Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
But that couldn't happen again.
We taught them a lesson in 1918,
and they haven't bothered us much at all since then.

The funny part though is that the song criticizes the US more so than the European countries.


I say a bygone should be a bygone,
Let's make peace the way we did in Stanleyville and Saigon.

/any excuse to quote Lehrer
 
2014-03-04 10:31:38 AM  

Ilmarinen: vpb: Albinoman: Well, nobody understands the policy of appeasement like Germany. Russia took a chunk of Georgia, why not Ukraine too?

I love how everything involving foreign policy is "appeasement".  How many wars would we have had by not if we fought every time some right winger started talking about "appeasement"?

Even if they did have a clue what they're talking about....

Chris: I want to do a little history check on you---what did Neville Chamberlain do wrong in 1939? What did he do wrong?
Kevin: It all goes back to appeasement. It's the key term.
Chris: No, what did he do, tell me what he did?
Kevin: It's the key term.
Chris: You have to answer this question. What did he do?
Kevin: It's the same thing, it puts it all...
Chris: Well tell me what he did?
Kevin: It's appeasement.
Chris: What did Chamberlain do wrong..
Kevin: His actions, his actions enabled, energized, legitimized
Chris: What did Chamberlain do?
Kevin: It's the exact same thing.
Chris: No stop, Kevin. I'm not going to continue with this interview unless you answer what that thing is. What did Chamberlain do in '39, tell me? '38?
Kevin: Chris, it's the exact same thing alright?
Chris: What did he do? <Yelling> What did he do!
Kevin: '38, '39 Chris what year do you want?
Chris: What did he do?
I want you to answer, what did Chamberlain?
He's talking, He's talking about appeasement.
Chris: What did Chamberlain do, just tell me what he did, Kevin? What did Chamberlain do that you didn't like?
Kevin: What, what Chamberlain did? <confused> What, what, the President was talking about, you just said the President was talking about Barack. Look...
Chris: You're making a reference to the days before our involvement in WWII. When the war in Europe began. I want you to tell me as an expert, what did Chamberlain do wrong.
Kevin: You're not going to box me in here, Chris. President Bush was making that. I'm glad, I'm glad.
Chris: You don't know, do you? You don't know what Neville Chamberlain did ...


You know, those are moments reporters live for: exposing farking frauds.

And that's what kills me. How hard would it be for the GOP to fire someone with even a hint of knowing what they're talking about? Not that the Democrats are immune to this bullshiat. Politics being politics, it sure as hell has a lot more to do with who you know than what you know. But seriously - shouldn't there at least be a farking MINIMUM?
 
2014-03-04 11:12:21 AM  

Grahor: Albinoman: Well, nobody understands the policy of appeasement like Germany. Russia took a chunk of Georgia, why not Ukraine too?

The thing is, the policy of appeasement works.

Even if we'll look at it in worst possible light for Russia. It took Russia 6 years to swallow tiny, insignificant piece of Georgia. Now it's a tiny, insignificant piece of Ukraine - believe me, Kiev will not miss Crimea. Then we'll have all those shiatholes around Russia they can bite pieces off: Kazachstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgizstan. Then it'll be a piece of Bielorussia and Moldavia. Then they'll probably get stuck in Finland.

That's 46 years of Russia biting. Much may happen in 46 years. Putin may die. 2 generations may change, and with them the worldview may change. Finally, a replacement for oil may be found.

So, what's your problem?


They already took a piece of Moldova (Transnistria) in '92.  Related to your earlier post, Moldova's tiny military is mobilizing.
 
2014-03-04 11:23:08 AM  
The Germans were doing pretty well until Hitler decided to order them to fight General Winter.

Had Hitler stayed out of WWII and let his Generals manage things, the world might look quite differently today. Luckily for us, we had a micromanaging egotistical moron in charge of Nazi Germany.
 
2014-03-04 11:25:03 AM  

northguineahills: They already took a piece of Moldova (Transnistria) in '92.  Related to your earlier post, Moldova's tiny military is mobilizing.


Interesting. But unsurprising. When Lithuania sent its contingent to Afghanistan, Ukraine supported the deployment with a platoon of medical personnel. Lithuania banned entry for Yanukovych and other members of the rogue government. And don't think Putin hasn't noticed. Putin has already accused Lithuania and Poland of training fighters in Kiev.

This could get very messy.
 
2014-03-04 11:50:23 AM  

hardinparamedic: The Germans were doing pretty well until Hitler decided to order them to fight General Winter.

Had Hitler stayed out of WWII and let his Generals manage things, the world might look quite differently today. Luckily for us, we had a micromanaging egotistical moron in charge of Nazi Germany.


Shirer says that Hitler's aggression saved the German army early on, and so really, his doucheyness both enabled and brought to a quick end NAZI Germany.
 
2014-03-04 12:10:08 PM  

vygramul: Shirer says that Hitler's aggression saved the German army early on, and so really, his doucheyness both enabled and brought to a quick end NAZI Germany


I'm early in the book "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", but it among others postulates that had Chamberlain and the rest of Europe not appeased Germany and dealt with their shiat in a joint fashion prior to the invasion of France and Poland, that Nazi Germany never would have had the chance to do their shenanigans in the first place, as the German army at that time was too weak despite it's technological advantages.
 
2014-03-04 12:26:56 PM  

hardinparamedic: vygramul: Shirer says that Hitler's aggression saved the German army early on, and so really, his doucheyness both enabled and brought to a quick end NAZI Germany

I'm early in the book "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", but it among others postulates that had Chamberlain and the rest of Europe not appeased Germany and dealt with their shiat in a joint fashion prior to the invasion of France and Poland, that Nazi Germany never would have had the chance to do their shenanigans in the first place, as the German army at that time was too weak despite it's technological advantages.


Oh, to be sure. But keep reading. That's exactly where I read the analysis regarding Hitler's trumping his generals actually turned out well for him in the beginning.
 
2014-03-04 12:40:55 PM  

hardinparamedic: vygramul: Shirer says that Hitler's aggression saved the German army early on, and so really, his doucheyness both enabled and brought to a quick end NAZI Germany

I'm early in the book "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", but it among others postulates that had Chamberlain and the rest of Europe not appeased Germany and dealt with their shiat in a joint fashion prior to the invasion of France and Poland, that Nazi Germany never would have had the chance to do their shenanigans in the first place, as the German army at that time was too weak despite it's technological advantages.


According to a series called "Hitler's Bodyguard," which uses more recent scholarship than Shirer had access to, if Chamberlain had stood up to Hitler at Munich, Hitler would have been deposed and shot by the Wehrmacht high command, rather than unilaterally attack Czechoslovakia. The Krauts probably would have failed miserably if they had tried to attack the Czechs; the Wehrmacht was far less capable in 1938 than two years later, and the Sudetenland fortresses were a very different problem than the open plains of Poland. And the Czech army, while small, was extremely well equipped; the Germans used Czech tanks for years after that.

BUT, no Hitler means no wartime crash research, no computers, no space race, no Internet. And we'd all have died from being overrun by kittens by now.
 
kgf
2014-03-04 01:26:52 PM  

hardinparamedic: The Germans were doing pretty well until Hitler decided to order them to fight General Winter.

Had Hitler stayed out of WWII and let his Generals manage things, the world might look quite differently today. Luckily for us, we had a micromanaging egotistical moron in charge of Nazi Germany.


Yep, but there are lot of what-if's.  What if Hitler hadn't allied with Mussolini, and then had to delay Barbarossa for six weeks to help Italy conquer Yugoslavia (because Italy couldn't do it by themselves).  That's six more weeks of campaigning weather the Germans would have had.

What if Goering didn't keep changing his mind about the goals of the Battle of Britain.  The Luftwaffe came very close to knocking the UK out of the war, which would have allowed Germany to focus on the USSR.

Yeah, Germany lost, but everybody seems to forget just how farking close they came to winning, and they were essentially fighting the whole world.
 
2014-03-04 01:34:11 PM  

mbillips: hardinparamedic: vygramul: Shirer says that Hitler's aggression saved the German army early on, and so really, his doucheyness both enabled and brought to a quick end NAZI Germany

I'm early in the book "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", but it among others postulates that had Chamberlain and the rest of Europe not appeased Germany and dealt with their shiat in a joint fashion prior to the invasion of France and Poland, that Nazi Germany never would have had the chance to do their shenanigans in the first place, as the German army at that time was too weak despite it's technological advantages.

According to a series called "Hitler's Bodyguard," which uses more recent scholarship than Shirer had access to, if Chamberlain had stood up to Hitler at Munich, Hitler would have been deposed and shot by the Wehrmacht high command, rather than unilaterally attack Czechoslovakia. The Krauts probably would have failed miserably if they had tried to attack the Czechs; the Wehrmacht was far less capable in 1938 than two years later, and the Sudetenland fortresses were a very different problem than the open plains of Poland. And the Czech army, while small, was extremely well equipped; the Germans used Czech tanks for years after that.

BUT, no Hitler means no wartime crash research, no computers, no space race, no Internet. And we'd all have died from being overrun by kittens by now.


Shirer actually says an attack on the Czechs would have been an unmitigated disaster for the Germans, who had no idea how well fortified the area was.

But beyond that, your assumptions are probably not all that Valid, as Stalin still wanted Eastern Europe, and that might have been the cause celebre rather than an afterthought for a war-exhausted world. (And then there's Japan.)
 
2014-03-04 04:22:07 PM  
Well good, we might Finally get a Solution to this issue...
 
2014-03-04 09:23:06 PM  

Bendal: cgraves67: vygramul: TheVeryDeadIanMartin: Wasn't Ukraine the easy bit for them?

In '41. It got substantially less easy for all involved after that.

In fact, March of '41. This is all happening on the 73rd anniversary of Crimea being overrun by Nazi Germany.


I think you mean 1942; the Germans didn't invade the Soviet Union at all until June of 1941.


1941 or 1942, whatever! You're missing the main point, the Nazis were bad. You know how they're always saying that history shouldn't be about memorizing dates, it should be about the grand ideas and what the common people were doing.  This is how we end up with high school graduates who can't tell you what century the Civil War took place, but, they know the slaves were freed, somewhere before or after it.  Anyway, they think it occurred after WWI and the Nazis were in that one, too.
 
2014-03-04 09:51:06 PM  

Elegy: Poland has been moving troops to its eastern border.

Third times the charm right Poland?


If this is true i'd wager its to prevent Putin from trying  to push into Poland in the event he takes all of the Ukraine.

That said if the US puts boots on the ground i'd not be surprised if the Poles joined the coalition they have been spoiling for pay back on Russia  since 1939 when they got stabbed in the back by them, and again when Stalin ordered his troops not to rush to Warsaw so the Nazis could crush the uprising so he would not have to deal with it.
 
2014-03-04 10:37:58 PM  

grimlock1972: Elegy: Poland has been moving troops to its eastern border.

Third times the charm right Poland?

If this is true i'd wager its to prevent Putin from trying  to push into Poland in the event he takes all of the Ukraine.

That said if the US puts boots on the ground i'd not be surprised if the Poles joined the coalition they have been spoiling for pay back on Russia  since 1939 when they got stabbed in the back by them, and again when Stalin ordered his troops not to rush to Warsaw so the Nazis could crush the uprising so he would not have to deal with it.


http://charter97.org/en/news/2014/3/3/88979/
 
2014-03-04 10:44:02 PM  

vygramul: grimlock1972: Elegy: Poland has been moving troops to its eastern border.

Third times the charm right Poland?

If this is true i'd wager its to prevent Putin from trying  to push into Poland in the event he takes all of the Ukraine.

That said if the US puts boots on the ground i'd not be surprised if the Poles joined the coalition they have been spoiling for pay back on Russia  since 1939 when they got stabbed in the back by them, and again when Stalin ordered his troops not to rush to Warsaw so the Nazis could crush the uprising so he would not have to deal with it.

http://charter97.org/en/news/2014/3/3/88979/


Okay do not blame the poles at all.
 
2014-03-05 08:57:27 AM  

vpb: Albinoman: Well, nobody understands the policy of appeasement like Germany. Russia took a chunk of Georgia, why not Ukraine too?

I love how everything involving foreign policy is "appeasement".  How many wars would we have had by not if we fought every time some right winger started talking about "appeasement"?


Well I love how I used a word used historically to describe something that mirrors what Germany did in the 30's and suddenly I'm some warmongering right winger! I didn't even know current politicians are using it. To me it's when a country annexes their neighbor (or at least a piece of it) and other countries just decide it's not worth fighting over.

Here you go: Wikipedia article on Appeasement so you know when to flip out and when not to.
 
2014-03-05 04:14:40 PM  
/any excuse to quote Lehrer

At least someone gets it.   Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
 
Displayed 24 of 74 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report