Support NeoGAF

[EviLore]

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

Ewww poor guys



When they get there (if they really get):

 

[Flash Junkins]

I mean, sure. But this isn't something that hasn't been been said by an entire generation who was instructed to duck under desks in case of nuclear war.

Signed,

One of those guys.

 

[EviLore]

 

[DeepBreath87]

Nixon was not as bad of a President as people like to pretend. He ended the war in Vietnam, opened relations with China (a good idea at the time that has been fucked up by later administrations), enforced desegregation, signed anti ballistic missile treaties with the USSR, and created the EPA.

Now he wasn’t all good, obviously. Watergate is a stain, and he started the War on Drugs, although an argument could be made that relaxing our position on drug use has actually resulted in pretty negative consequences. The larger problem was that he was excessively paranoid and that ended up getting the best of him. He wound up isolated.

Regardless, Nixon was actually not a terrible President. He got a lot of things done and was a smart guy. I actually think Watergate casts too large of a shadow over him.

 

[Thaedolus]

Nixon was not as bad of a President as people like to pretend. He ended the war in Vietnam, opened relations with China (a good idea at the time that has been fucked up by later administrations), enforced desegregation, signed anti ballistic missile treaties with the USSR, and created the EPA.

Now he wasn’t all good, obviously. Watergate is a stain, and he started the War on Drugs, although an argument could be made that relaxing our position on drug use has actually resulted in pretty negative consequences. The larger problem was that he was excessively paranoid and that ended up getting the best of him. He wound up isolated.

Regardless, Nixon was actually not a terrible President. He got a lot of things done and was a smart guy. I actually think Watergate casts too large of a shadow over him.

When a Candidate Conspired With a Foreign Power to Win An Election

It took decades to unravel Nixon’s sabotage of Vietnam peace talks. Now, the full story can be told.

www.politico.com

Readers React: Nixon's sabotage of peace talks in Vietnam is worse than anything he did in Watergate

To the editor: David Schribman’s piece about the “progressive” presidency of Richard M.

www.latimes.com

ORLY?

 

[Thaedolus]

P.S.: I don’t think Nixon was dumb, but him being right about what would come next with the former USSR is beside the point. He was a bad president because he was a corrupt alcoholic criminal. That’s a non-starter for a legitimate western democracy. If we just accepted his alcoholic criminality which almost caused a constitutional crisis because he did some other good things, we’re fucked. That’s a path to self annihilation the likes of which only VV Putin could hope to accomplish.

Don’t “well actually” actual criminals.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

Ewww poor guys



When they get there (if they really get):

They are going to be walking there

 

[DeepBreath87]

P.S.: I don’t think Nixon was dumb, but him being right about what would come next with the former USSR is beside the point. He was a bad president because he was a corrupt alcoholic criminal. That’s a non-starter for a legitimate western democracy. If we just accepted his alcoholic criminality which almost caused a constitutional crisis because he did some other good things, we’re fucked. That’s a path to self annihilation the likes of which only VV Putin could hope to accomplish.

Don’t “well actually” actual criminals.

So I am reading articles. I got to the part where the Soviets are trying to get Humphreys elected by leaning on their North Vietnamese proxies to make concessions. They openly say that the Communist USSR was plotting to influence an American election and that the Johnson administration was aware of it and tried to use it to their advantage. The Soviets thought the Democratic candidate was more sympathetic to communists.

That sounds awfully familiar…

As for the alcoholic stuff, I think you’ll find quite a few US Presidents qualified under that category, including the guy that beat Nixon the first time around. People still think he was a good President though.

Like I said, I don’t ignore the fact he did bad things. Lots of presidents did and do. But Nixon accomplished a lot of good things. Watergate casts an outsized shadow.

 

[poppabk]

Could Nixon really have predicted a leader of a world power becoming paranoid and increasingly isolated, using desperate illegal means to try and hang on to a crumbling throne, with the help of a bunch of cronies? Doubtful.

 

[DeepBreath87]

Could Nixon really have predicted a leader of a world power becoming paranoid and increasingly isolated, using desperate illegal means to try and hang on to a crumbling throne, with the help of a bunch of cronies? Doubtful.

Nixon won 60% of the popular vote. His paranoia and hubris were character flaws far more than it was a sign of unpopularity or a “crumbing throne”.

 

[MrMephistoX]

Nixon won 60% of the popular vote. His paranoia and hubris were character flaws far more than it was a sign of unpopularity or a “crumbing throne”.

I’ve always been fascinated by Nixon too. Watergate was a mistake that looks like childsplay compared to two other more recent impeachable offenses plus he had the dignity to resign and a GOP willing to call him out. Policy wise he’d be considered a modern day democrat on many issues.

 

[DeepBreath87]

I’ve always been fascinated by Nixon too. Watergate was a mistake that looks like childsplay compared to two other more recent impeachable offenses plus he had the dignity to resign and a GOP willing to call him out. Policy wise he’d be considered a modern day democrat on many issues.

I find him interesting as well. A flawed man for sure, but so is everyone. His insecurities were probably a strength during his rise but ultimately led to his downfall. Which is a shame. He did a lot of good things domestically and internationally. A lot of that gets twisted up because he’s ultimately thought of as a villain. I think if you look at him dispassionately, though, he was an above average President in terms of actual governing, which I value more than personal failings. But his inability to control his lesser impulses shouldn’t be ignored.

 

[Tams]

'40,000' Syrians, huh?

If true, I'm not saying we should bomb Syria again, but we should bomb Syria again.

 

[Atrus]

'40,000' Syrians, huh?

If true, I'm not saying we should bomb Syria again, but we should bomb Syria again.

Wouldn’t change much. It’s a poor country so people just sign up to make more as “mercenaries” which other nations use as ammunition sponges and distractions.

 

[Tams]

Wouldn’t change much. It’s a poor country so people just sign up to make more as “mercenaries” which other nations use as ammunition sponges and distractions.

Eh, it would save some work and suffering for the Ukrainians, potentially kill some Russian recuiters and trainers, and show Putin that we are willing to push back.

 

[poppabk]

Eh, it would save some work and suffering for the Ukrainians, potentially kill some Russian recuiters and trainers, and show Putin that we are willing to push back.

Yep nothing says "we're the good guys' like bombing the shit out of an impoverished nation on a flimsy pretext.

 

[Atrus]

Eh, it would save some work and suffering for the Ukrainians, potentially kill some Russian recuiters and trainers, and show Putin that we are willing to push back.

The problem is that you’ve got 40,000 people volunteering for money or being “volunteered” by a dictator.

If you start bombing Syria in response, you might accelerate mercenary recruitment as people rush to “defend” their country. Even worse would be if it’s treated as a religious issue and now you’ve got some sort of international mujahideen going into Ukraine.

 

[Aggelos]

 

[MisterFalcon]

Nixon won 60% of the popular vote. His paranoia and hubris were character flaws far more than it was a sign of unpopularity or a “crumbing throne”.

Nixon entered one Congress election on both the Republican and Democratic ballot after winning both parties' primaries, that is some 0,0001% ultra rare achievement unlocked.

 

[Rentahamster]

The sanctions are sending a message. The Russian propaganda is so strong that many citizens wouldn't have been aware that anything's changed at all if it weren't for all their favorite stuff shutting down.

 

[Tams]

Yep nothing says "we're the good guys' like bombing the shit out of an impoverished nation on a flimsy pretext.

The problem with that argument is that they are volunteering to go and try and harm another country. A country that even now, while under attack, isn't as corrupt and messed up as theirs.

If they sign up for that, they deserve and should die. If they do go to Ukraine, there's a strong chance they'll die horrible in the cold there, far from home. They'll be mercenaries, so the Ukrainians will have zero obligation and certainly not the will to treat them well.

I'm not saying we bomb random Syrian cities like Russia.

The problem is that you’ve got 40,000 people volunteering for money or being “volunteered” by a dictator.

If you start bombing Syria in response, you might accelerate mercenary recruitment as people rush to “defend” their country. Even worse would be if it’s treated as a religious issue and now you’ve got some sort of international mujahideen going into Ukraine.

You don't just get 40,000 across several borders without staging camps.

And it would depend on were these fighters come from.

If they even exist in such numbers.

Rogozin is such a shitposter.

 

[QSD]

According to Dutch news, the prime ministers of Poland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic are heading to Kyiv by train to show their support for Ukraine. Pretty daring move, hats off to them.

 

[M1chl]

Pretty brave

 

[DeepBreath87]

According to Dutch news, the prime ministers of Poland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic are heading to Kyiv by train to show their support for Ukraine. Pretty daring move, hats off to them.

Sounds like the precursor to World War 3 from some Tom Clancy novel.

 

[QSD]

Sounds like the precursor to World War 3 from some Tom Clancy novel.

could be

could also be the start of a joke

anyway, haven't seen this reported elsewhere, here's a google translation of the news item:

The heads of government of the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Poland want to go to Kiev today to show support for Ukraine on behalf of the European Union.

The purpose of the visit is to convey our unequivocal support for Ukraine and its freedom and independence, Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala wrote in a tweet.

Fiala is accompanied by his Slovenian counterpart Janez Janša, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and Polish Deputy Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski. They have coordinated their visit with the European Commission and the UN. It is the first time since the beginning of the war that a high-level European delegation is going to Kiev.

The office of Ukrainian President Zelensky has confirmed the announced visit, but did not provide further details. It is not clear how the heads of government will go to the Ukrainian capital. Kiev is partially surrounded by Russian troops and under artillery fire.

 

[M1chl]

Sounds like the precursor to World War 3 from some Tom Clancy novel.

Given the situation, we (czechs) have no other choice, since UA workers are force behind any construction work here. My father retired, because most of his workforce went to war, for example. and given the past difficulties with visas for UA people, their membership in EU can't come soon enough.

 

[DeepBreath87]

Given the situation, we (czechs) have no other choice, since UA workers are force behind any construction work here. My father retired, because most of his workforce went to war, for example. and given the past difficulties with visas for UA people, their membership in EU can't come soon enough.

I’m not criticizing the trip. Good for them. It’s certainly brave. I’m just saying there is probably a book about World War 3 that starts out with a handful of leaders getting together inside a war zone only for some errant artillery fire to spark the end of civilization.

 

[M1chl]

I’m not criticizing the trip. Good for them. It’s certainly brave. I’m just saying there is probably a book about World War 3 that starts out with a handful of leaders getting together inside a war zone only for some errant artillery fire to spark the end of civilization.

Yeah it does sound like that, hopefully nothing major happened, because they are NATO-member citizens basically.

I am not exactly sure that someone would care that much, if they would to be hurt in the situation, from a general public.

 

[DeafTourette]

Has no idea he also tried to do the very things some democrats are trying to do now... He was ahead of the curve ...

 

[Airbus Jr]

 

[DrAspirino]

Regardless, Nixon was actually not a terrible President. He got a lot of things done and was a smart guy. I actually think Watergate casts too large of a shadow over him.

Seriously?

United States intervention in Chile - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

On 15 September 1970; before Allende took office, Richard Nixon gave the order to overthrow Allende. According to a declassified document from the NSA, the handwritten notes from Richard Helms (CIA director at the time) state: "1 in 10 chance perhaps, but save Chile!; worth spending; not concerned; no involvement of embassy; $10,000,000 available, more if necessary; full-time job--best men we have; game plan; make the economy scream; 48 hours for plan of action." These notes came from a meeting Helms had with President Nixon, indicating the administration's willingness to stage a coup in Chile and the extent to which Nixon was willing to go to do so.

SERIOUSLY?

Because to me, staging a coup ON A FOREIGN DEMOCRACY is nothing short of being an asshole. The fact that Nixon died a free man, and Kissinger is still alive and free speaks loads of the hypocrisy of the US regarding foreign interventions.

...and the US government has the gall...THE GALL to criticize and ban Putin.

 

[EviLore]

...and the US government has the gall...THE GALL to criticize and ban Putin.

A US president was found to be corrupt, and was promptly removed from office for it, 48 years ago, therefore the US government can't criticize Putin?

 

[belmarduk]

I suggest you google Biden killing US oil …a week into his presidency…. No magic button needed.

And also while you are at it google why the green new deal didn’t pass.

It’s politics. That’s how they get things. You hide what you really want behind some grand PR facade.

A single pipeline that was only 8% complete is hardly killing US oil.. that oil would have come from Canada, anyway. Don't worry though, we still get plenty from Canada. In fact, they are the largest importer of oil to the US.

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

 

[QSD]

A US president was found to be corrupt, and was promptly removed from office for it, 48 years ago, therefore the US government can't criticize Putin?

I think what he's more upset about is perceived double standards re: meddling in the affairs of another sovereign country.

I kind of agree staging a coup is fucked, but what Putin's doing to Ukraine seems to me on a different level

 

[DrAspirino]

A US president was found to be corrupt, and was promptly removed from office for it, 48 years ago, therefore the US government can't criticize Putin?

1) He should've been in jail.

2) Every single US administration has interveined foreign countries, most of the time NOT by request of the interveined country, only to advance the US interests, so I don't see how that is any different of what Russia is doing right now.

Now, I'm talking about US government, NOT the US people, who most of the time has absolutely no saying in what their politicians do.

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

I can see 2 things from this (hope to be wrong).

1) We won't see her until she is in better condition until the beating they did to her does not look too apparent.

2) She committed "suicide" Russian style......



New Day, Fuck Putin.

 

[DrAspirino]

2) She committed "suicide" Russian style......

Or like we say in Chile (and Argentina as well), she "tripped on a bullet".

 

[EviLore]

1) He should've been in jail.

2) Every single US administration has interveined foreign countries, most of the time NOT by request of the interveined country, only to advance the US interests, so I don't see how that is any different of what Russia is doing right now.

Now, I'm talking about US government, NOT the US people, who most of the time has absolutely no saying in what their politicians do.

1) The POTUS is immune from criminal prosecution while in office, hence the impeachment/removal process. He was pardoned on the way out, which also serves as a mechanism for a peaceful resolution in the case of a leader who must be removed. What you feel should've happened is not relevant. The constitutional process is the process.

2) The US has engaged in less than ideal geopolitical behavior at times since becoming dominant, but overall the world has become far more peaceful and prosperous than it would have been via any realistic alternative.

 

[Hypereides]

The Russian government prosecutors are now demanding that Navalny gets his prison sentence increased by an additional 13 years. The charges for his imprisonment were sketchy to begin with and practically, pulled out of thin air. The fucking mafia state is doing everything in its power to hinder this guy from gaining a legitimate chance. Would be a shame if the Russian people got an actual leader over a mob boss trying to pass as a politician.

Prosecutors Demand Extra 13-Year Prison Sentence for Alexei Navalny - The Moscow Times

Russian state prosecutors requested a judge sentence Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny to an additional 13 years in prison on charges of fraud and contempt of court, the independent Novaya Gazeta newspaper reported Tuesday.

www.themoscowtimes.com

Almost reads like a prophecy.

 

[QSD]

1) He should've been in jail.

2) Every single US administration has interveined foreign countries, most of the time NOT by request of the interveined country, only to advance the US interests, so I don't see how that is any different of what Russia is doing right now.

Now, I'm talking about US government, NOT the US people, who most of the time has absolutely no saying in what their politicians do.

You can certainly criticize US foreign policy subterfuge. People like Chomsky and Chris Hedges do a good job of laying out that position. But what Putin is doing now is waging an unprovoked war of indiscriminate destruction on Ukraine. Most US foreign policy stunts don't willfully destroy a countries infrastructure or level its cities. They are usually half-aimed at american interestes, half-misguided attempts at bringing democracy, not outright conquest like Putin is doing now. I agree with EviLore here, it's far from ideal but it's better than the alternatives

 

[Wildebeest]

Richard Nixon was a big fan of the "limited hangout" where you let a bit of the truth just "hang out" so people stop digging for the damaging information.

 

[DeepBreath87]

Seriously?

United States intervention in Chile - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

SERIOUSLY?

Because to me, staging a coup ON A FOREIGN DEMOCRACY is nothing short of being an asshole. The fact that Nixon died a free man, and Kissinger is still alive and free speaks loads of the hypocrisy of the US regarding foreign interventions.

...and the US government has the gall...THE GALL to criticize and ban Putin.

Are you new to international politics? I feel like people are confused. The US President’s job is to do things he believes will benefit and strengthen the United States. I know we play this stupid game now where international relations are some high minded, white gloves thing. They’re not. It’s as cutthroat as anything could be.

The point is for powerful countries to set up the rules so that doing things like what Russia is doing now is not seen as something that will benefit the countries that do it. It’s not that Russia shouldn’t invade Ukraine because it’s mean or wrong. It’s that that shouldn’t invade Ukraine because Russia is fucking itself and it’s people.

The US meddling in Central and South America 50 years ago really isn’t subject to some moral judgement. It’s just “is what is happening good for the United States people and position in the world”. That’s really it. Now if the US had been punished like Russia is being punished, that would’ve made those decisions bad ones. You could also make arguments that the current corruption in Central America is what is causing us to have our current issues with mass migration and that the US bears some responsibility for that. You could argue as you are, although it’s weaker, that the US meddling in the affairs of other countries lessens its standing in this current situation. Those are coherent arguments.

But complaining about how what Nixon did was “wrong” doesn’t really mean anything. It’s either a good decision practically for the United States or it wasn’t.

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

Spoiler: dead Russian general photo[MEDIA=twitter

1503658896724004865[/MEDIA]

On the Top 20 Countdown!

 

[STARSBarry]

On the Top 20 Countdown!

I know it's meant to be a "bad guy", but does no one else not feel that this is just uttely morbid? Like we have reached a point where people just take a photo of the dead and upload it to twitter to keep score.

This makes me feel so old.

 

[QSD]

Are you new to international politics? I feel like people are confused. The US President’s job is to do things he believes will benefit and strengthen the United States. I know we play this stupid game now where international relations are some high minded, white gloves thing. They’re not. It’s as cutthroat as anything could be.

The point is for powerful countries to set up the rules so that doing things like what Russia is doing now is not seen as something that will benefit the countries that do it. It’s not that Russia shouldn’t invade Ukraine because it’s mean or wrong. It’s that that shouldn’t invade Ukraine because Russia is fucking itself and it’s people.

The US meddling in Central and South America 50 years ago really isn’t subject to some moral judgement. It’s just “is what is happening good for the United States people and position in the world”. That’s really it. Now if the US had been punished like Russia is being punished, that would’ve made those decisions bad ones. You could also make arguments that the current corruption in Central America is what is causing us to have our current issues with mass migration and that the US bears some responsibility for that. You could argue as you are, although it’s weaker, that the US meddling in the affairs of other countries lessens its standing in this current situation. Those are coherent arguments.

But complaining about how what Nixon did was “wrong” doesn’t really mean anything. It’s either a good decision practically for the United States or it wasn’t.

Pretty cynical post, though not untrue

Isn't it kind of a red herring though? The moral judgement of other countries of the US's earlier foreign policy meddling is partially what determines the US's standing in this situation. Another part is determined by the standing of Russia/Putin, which is so terrible that the US comes off looking like a beacon of righteousness in comparison.

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

Are you new to international politics? I feel like people are confused. The US President’s job is to do things he believes will benefit and strengthen the United States. I know we play this stupid game now where international relations are some high minded, white gloves thing. They’re not. It’s as cutthroat as anything could be.

The point is for powerful countries to set up the rules so that doing things like what Russia is doing now is not seen as something that will benefit the countries that do it. It’s not that Russia shouldn’t invade Ukraine because it’s mean or wrong. It’s that that shouldn’t invade Ukraine because Russia is fucking itself and it’s people.

The US meddling in Central and South America 50 years ago really isn’t subject to some moral judgement. It’s just “is what is happening good for the United States people and position in the world”. That’s really it. Now if the US had been punished like Russia is being punished, that would’ve made those decisions bad ones. You could also make arguments that the current corruption in Central America is what is causing us to have our current issues with mass migration and that the US bears some responsibility for that. You could argue as you are, although it’s weaker, that the US meddling in the affairs of other countries lessens its standing in this current situation. Those are coherent arguments.

But complaining about how what Nixon did was “wrong” doesn’t really mean anything. It’s either a good decision practically for the United States or it wasn’t.

While not everyone thinks that way there is a good lesson to be drawn from the statement in how to deal with people that lack humanity, or specifically the ability to empathize with the suffering of others, and that is to appeal to their self-preservation instinct since that is what they value and they will say and do anything to justify their selfishness.

I know it's meant to be a "bad guy", but does no one else not feel that this is just uttely morbid? Like we have reached a point where people just take a photo of the dead and upload it to twitter to keep score.

This makes me feel so old.

Considering the invaders intentions, both immediate and grand scale if they had control, noting these deaths marks progress and are encouraging which brings celebration.

 

[DeepBreath87]

While not everyone thinks that way there is a good lesson to be drawn from the statement in how to deal with people that lack humanity, or specifically the ability to empathize with the suffering of others, and that is to appeal to their self-preservation instinct since that is what they value and will say and do anything to justify their selfishness.


Considering the invaders intentions, both immediate and grand scale if they had control, noting these deaths some progress and are encouraging which can be celebrated.

Enjoy your fantasy about the way you wish things were. I’ll be over here talking about the way they actually are. Human history is pretty clear though.

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

Enjoy your fantasy about the way you wish things were. I’ll be over here talking about the way they actually are. Human history is pretty clear though.

You enjoy your fantasy too much.