Musk on USAID: ‘Time for it to die’

[Hans Blaster]

Okay, so then why the disparate responses to the two situations? (not from you personally, just in general)

Because russia has invaded, China hasn't done that yet.

[rest of post irrelevant]

 

[ThatRobGuy]

NATO isn't a threat to Russian security, NATO is a reactionary force. It defends rather than attacks.
NATO is however a threat to Russian plans of expansion by force.

If there was no NATO, Russia would still have invaded Ukraine. Just like Trump, Putin wants Ukraine resources.

That's a very naive take on it.

NATO has proven themselves to be "a little more aggressive" than you describe on a number of incidents.


- NATO intervened in the Kosovo conflict without United Nations Security Council (UNSC) approval, launching a 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)

- Under a UN mandate to impose a no-fly zone to protect civilians, NATO launched extensive airstrikes against Muammar Gaddafi’s forces. However, NATO went beyond the resolution’s scope by actively aiding rebel forces and contributing to regime change.

- Although NATO promised in the 1990s not to expand eastward after the Cold War, it has since admitted several former Soviet-aligned states.

- NATO had prolonged involvement in nation-building and counterinsurgency in Afghanistan, which raised some questions about whether it had exceeded its defensive-only mandate.


NATO has a history of, under the guise of "providing reactionary defense forces", going beyond that scope, and trying to convert the non-westernized counties they're operating in, to westernized ones aligned with North American and Western Euro interests.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Because russia has invaded, China hasn't done that yet.

[rest of post irrelevant]

Interesting...hmmm...they invaded annexed Crimea by force in 2014.

I don't recall the same responses. In fact, the typical war hawks were itching to "do something about it" and pushing for the US to provide "lethal military aid" to Ukraine, and it was the progressives saying "no, it's not our fight, we don't want to escalate tensions with Russia"

What changed from 2014 to 2022? ...or what new factors were introduced?


And the rest of the post isn't irrelevant...to be blunt, the reason why left-leaning people were a little extra inclined to kiss China's ass was because Trump called covid "The China Virus" and imposed travel bans, therefore defending China became yet another way for people to signal how "Anti-Trump" they were.

If you're ignoring the political virtue signaling component to any of these world conflicts (whether it be Russia/Ukraine, China/Taiwan, Israel/Palestine), then you're ignoring half the story.

The reality is, there's a "not small" percentage of the US population that would gleefully be "Pro-Grinch" if they thought Santa Claus liked Trump.

 

[stevil]

Then again, there's nothing for you to argue against. Pull all aid. Leave it to others. Exactly what Trump is doing.

It seems this govt is going to be famous as the "Do nothing" administration, much like the House of Representatives after the last mid terms.

The problem as I see it, with USA pulling out of WHO and stopping USAID is that contagious outbreaks that used to be contained in some small foreign village will likely end up going global.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Interesting...hmmm...they invaded annexed Crimea by force in 2014.

I don't recall the same responses. In fact, the typical war hawks were itching to "do something about it" and pushing for the US to provide "lethal military aid" to Ukraine, and it was the progressives saying "no, it's not our fight, we don't want to escalate tensions with Russia"

What changed from 2014 to 2022? ...or what new factors were introduced?

And like fools we ignored it collectively. Also,

a) there were a lot of people that didn't realize that the annexation of Crimea was a direct seizure of power by military means by putin and the russian army
b) 8 years of direct evidence of russia attacking our countries with active measures.

 

[stevil]

That's a very naive take on it.

NATO has proven themselves to be "a little more aggressive" than you describe on a number of incidents.


- NATO intervened in the Kosovo conflict without United Nations Security Council (UNSC) approval, launching a 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)

- Under a UN mandate to impose a no-fly zone to protect civilians, NATO launched extensive airstrikes against Muammar Gaddafi’s forces. However, NATO went beyond the resolution’s scope by actively aiding rebel forces and contributing to regime change.

- Although NATO promised in the 1990s not to expand eastward after the Cold War, it has since admitted several former Soviet-aligned states.

- NATO had prolonged involvement in nation-building and counterinsurgency in Afghanistan, which raised some questions about whether it had exceeded its defensive-only mandate.


NATO has a history of, under the guise of "providing reactionary defense forces", going beyond that scope, and trying to convert the non-westernized counties they're operating in, to westernized ones aligned with North American and Western Euro interests.

You have cited incidents where NATO has intervened in defense.
But can you name a country that NATO has started a war with, and sought to steal land? For example, like what Russia has done to Ukraine.

 

[Chesterton]

NATO isn't a threat to Russian security, NATO is a reactionary force. It defends rather than attacks.
NATO is however a threat to Russian plans of expansion by force.

If there was no NATO, Russia would still have invaded Ukraine. Just like Trump, Putin wants Ukraine resources.

NATO is a dinosaur. It has no reason to exist in the modern world. The only purpose it serves is to agitate and provoke Russia. It's past time for it to die.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And like fools we ignored it collectively. Also,

a) there were a lot of people that didn't realize that the annexation of Crimea was a direct seizure of power by military means by putin and the russian army
b) 8 years of direct evidence of russia attacking our countries with active measures.

You're being too optimistic about the nature of petty partisanship lol.

People were well aware of it, but they didn't see "Putin has territorial ambitions" by itself, as something that was all that concerning to them.

It wasn't until "He has territorial ambitions AND he likes Trump?!?!...the guy I hate?!?!...whoa, we better get them equipped with some weapons ASAP, and hop on Amazon and order a Ukrainian flag shirt"

You may not think that way, but that's the exact mentality of a lot of people on the left these days.

 

[stevil]

NATO is a dinosaur. It has no reason to exist in the modern world. The only purpose it serves is to agitate and provoke Russia. It's past time for it to die.

Russia invading Ukraine is proof that NATO is needed.

 

[Chesterton]

Russia invading Ukraine is proof that NATO is needed.

NATO is the reason Russia invaded.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

You have cited incidents where NATO has intervened in defense.
But can you name a country that NATO has started a war with, and sought to steal land? For example, like what Russia has done to Ukraine.

It doesn't have to go to full blown "land stealing" for them to have gone beyond their scope.

Contributing to regime change goes beyond what they're supposed to be doing. If their job is defense and peacekeeping, then that's where it ends. They shouldn't be "picking winners and losers" in other countries' internal disputes.

 

[stevil]

NATO is the reason Russia invaded.

That's silly. Ukraine isn't even a NATO country.
If Russia has a beef with NATO, then shouldn't they be attacking a NATO country?

Oh, that's right, they are too scared to do that. This is why NATO is needed.

 

[stevil]

It doesn't have to go to full blown "land stealing" for them to have gone beyond their scope.

Contributing to regime change goes beyond what they're supposed to be doing.

Is NATO going to start a war with Russia?

 

[Jipsah]

If you claim to care about the less fortunate in the world, what Trump/Musk are doing is the antithesis of that.

OK, we understand your political position now.

“The warp-speed of this mafia-like takeover has shaken USAID staff to the core.”

Oooooh, "mafia-like"! Or perhaps better comparable to the police raiding a mob-run criminal operation.

Sources told ABC News the Trump administration’s foreign aid cuts are being overseen by Peter Marocco, a campaign ally in the Office of Foreign Assistance who was reportedly caught on camera inside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

He was probably there Overthrowing The Government <ROFL>

"They're trying to eliminate the agency," Konyndyk said.

Trying and succeeding, looks like.

"They have announced no plan and given no rationale — they're just taking everything down," Konyndyk said. "They're trying to do it behind the scenes rather than openly," he said

Except that it was on every major news outlet in the western hemisphere.

so they don't have to "defend what they're doing" in announcements to the public.

But they did, didn't they?

The consequences of a diminished or erased USAID would be dire, Konyndyk said,

Yeah, I mean, who would be there to finance "DEI musicals" in Ireland, sex changes and "LGBT activism in Guatemala, or irrigation systems for poppy plantations and heroin production in Afghanistan?

noting that one key component of its programs is keeping outbreaks and epidemics from reaching U.S. shores.

How'd that work out on that last epidemic? Even with USAID's research conducted at Wuhan Labs?

USAID is "enduring an unlawful shutdown, purge, and dismantling," wrote Dr. Atul Gawande, former assistant administrator for global health at USAID, in a post on Bluesky on Sunday.

I reckon they'll see you in court.

"Gawande told NPR. "USAID has become the place where the administration is demonstrating and developing its playbook for eviscerating other targeted agencies."

Sacred cows being something of a drug on the market right now.

The web shutdown comes in the wake of both the stop work order and the furloughing or laying off of hundreds of USAID employees. In his first two weeks in office, the Trump administration placed senior leadership at USAID on leave and laid off or furloughed more than 400 contractors in the agency's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance and also laid off hundreds more in its Global Health Bureau.

Best luck in your job searches, y'all,

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Is NATO going to start a war with Russia?

No

But you don't have to start the war to intervene in ways that go well beyond the original scope.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That's silly. Ukraine isn't even a NATO country.
If Russia has a beef with NATO, then shouldn't they be attacking a NATO country?

Oh, that's right, they are too scared to do that. This is why NATO is needed.

By NATO, you mean the US...

The rest of the countries in the organization combined don't create the same level of deterrence the US does.


However:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/

Given the track record of assuring Russia that we wouldn't accept any former soviet member states into NATO (a promise that's been broken several times), Biden offering that up certainly didn't help matters.

 

[Hans Blaster]

You're being too optimistic about the nature of petty partisanship lol.

People were well aware of it, but they didn't see "Putin has territorial ambitions" by itself, as something that was all that concerning to them.

It wasn't until "He has territorial ambitions AND he likes Trump?!?!...the guy I hate?!?!...whoa, we better get them equipped with some weapons ASAP, and hop on Amazon and order a Ukrainian flag shirt"

You may not think that way, but that's the exact mentality of a lot of people on the left these days.

I've grown tired of your cynical whataboutism.

 

[stevil]

By NATO, you mean the US...

No, by NATO, I mean NATO. Glad to clarify, if there was some confusion there.

 

[stevil]

No

Excellent, we agree then.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I've grown tired of your cynical whataboutism.

It's not whataboutism...it's cynical, yes, but also realistic.

These 20-somethings with their "I stand with Ukraine" Facebook borders couldn't have found Ukraine on a map 2 years prior.

They want to support Ukraine (and reverse their previous anti-war stance) because "Putin help Orange man, and Orange man bad".


If you want to see the political IQ/acumen of people in the US under age 30 these days, here it is

"Well, those stuffy conservatives like Israel, so we're backing Palestine! Look at our Queers for Palestine banner that shows a commie fist on a rainbow flag...nevermind the fact that Muslim countries hate both communists and gay people...we need to back the side that the republicans don't like, and that has a little more pigment"