[Unthinking Majority]

A large portion of the developing world also had serious troubles from international meddling from the end of the Cold war until the present, while we lived in a uni-polar world.

"A large portion"? Certainly not on the scale of the Cold War.

And during the Cold war era, the USA and other western nations invaded or meddled in countries that had no significant Soviet influence.

Most of these acted through some sort of Cold War calculus. I can't even name one that wasn't, off the top of my head.

A uni-polar world with the US or the west at the helm is not more peaceful or better for the developing countries.

Wishful thinking. The evidence doesn't bear out this conclusion, its more peaceful in every continent in the world, the only region that might be an exception is the middle east, which wasn't any more peaceful during the Cold War, and post-1989 has been driven by non-state actors who have also been attacking their own countries and neighbours.

[JohnRawls]

You'd be a loony if you just thought that blowing up the pipe line was equivalent to saying 9/11 was an inside job, let alone introducing your ridiculous hyperbole about space lasers.

When a mafia boss threatens someone and then they wind up dead, their guilt is presumed. They don't get innocent until proven guilty, at least in the court of public opinion. Because when a Mafia boss threatens someone and they end up dead, the effect is the same even when they did die from a genuine coincidental accident. You'd like to believe this wasn't done by The US, but you know full well the is may have been done by the United States its just convenient for you and others to gas light us into making out its some far fetched extravagant conspiracy theory.

The United States (and Mossad although I don't suspect them here), do engage in black ops. Yes we hope they've toned things down a bit since the days of MK Ultra, but black ops still go on. I'm not saying they are even always wrong to carry out those operations. And yes I don't doubt the FSB like its KGB predecessor engages in black ops as well and they possibly get up to worse things than the United States.

But in this case there's just no plausible justification for Putin carrying out Biden's dirty work for him. The damage has been done, there can be long term energy security from under sea pipe lines. Eastern European states want the money and leverage that comes from resource pipe lines crossing their territory. Again I think its highly likely that getting a direct land route from Russia to Moldova / Romania, cutting out Ukraine was one thing that Putin was hoping to get out of this war if it had gone better.

Whatever. Where is your proof?

[Fasces]

Russia failed to get the UN Security Council to ask for an independent inquiry into explosions in September that ruptured the Nord Stream gas pipelines connecting Russia and Germany, spewing massive amounts of methane gas into the Baltic Sea.

Only Russia, China and Brazil voted in favour of the Russian-drafted text on Monday, while the remaining 12 council members abstained. A resolution needs at least nine votes in favour and no vetoes by Russia, China, France, the United States or the United Kingdom to pass.

Russia proposed the draft resolution last month, just days before the first anniversary of its invasion of Ukraine.

The Kremlin said on Tuesday it would keep demanding an international investigation into the blasts. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said everyone should be interested in an impartial investigation in order to find the culprits.

Russia has complained it has not been kept informed about ongoing national investigations. Moscow has maintained, without providing evidence, Western nations were behind the explosions.

“Without an objective and transparent international investigation, the truth will not be uncovered as to what happened,” Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told the council before the vote.

The pipeline blasts occurred in the exclusive economic zones of Sweden and Denmark. Last month Sweden, Denmark and Germany said their own separate investigations were still ongoing and Russia has been informed.

In a joint letter to the Security Council, they said the damage was caused by “powerful explosions due to sabotage”. The US and NATO have also called the incident “an act of sabotage”.

“The United States was not involved in any way. Period,” said deputy US ambassador to the UN Robert Wood.

He accused Russia of trying to “discredit the work of ongoing national investigations and prejudice any conclusions they reach that do not comport to Russia’s predetermined and political narrative”.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/2 ... am-inquiry

Security Council Rejects Draft Resolution Establishing Commission to Investigate Sabotage of Nord Stream Pipeline

The Security Council failed today to adopt a resolution, put forward by the representative of the Russian Federation, which would have established an international independent investigative commission into the September 2022 “acts of sabotage” committed on the Nord Stream gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea.

By a vote of 3 in favour (Brazil, China, Russian Federation) to none against, with 12 abstentions, the Council rejected the draft resolution, owing to a lack of sufficient votes in favour.

The resolution, if adopted, would have requested the Secretary-General to establish an international, independent investigation commission to conduct a comprehensive, transparent and impartial international investigation of all aspects of the act of sabotage on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines — including identification of its perpetrators, sponsors, organizers and accomplices.

It would have outlined the commission’s composition, deciding that it would comprise “impartial and internationally respected experts” selected by the Secretary-General, and be furnished with an adequate number of experienced and impartial staff.

Further by its terms, the Council would have requested the Secretary-General to report to it within 30 days on recommendations for the proposed specific modalities of the commission, and encouraged Member States — including those conducting their own relevant national investigations — to fully cooperate and share information with the commission.

Speaking before the vote, the representative of the Russian Federation said his delegation was proposing the establishment of a United Nations-led, independent investigation into the Nord Stream gas pipeline attacks due to its “serious and very well-founded doubts” about the transparency of national investigations currently being conducted, namely by Denmark, Germany and Sweden. A more comprehensive and transparent investigation is needed, he stressed, especially given the emergence of new facts and media reports about the Nord Stream incidents. He also warned that “precious time is being wasted” and that national investigations could go on for years.

China’s representative, expressing regret over the draft resolution’s failure, said that an international investigation would not, in fact, conflict with the national ones currently under way. A United Nations-led investigation could play a coordinating role and make the findings of other studies even more authoritative. Launching a United Nations-led investigation is also the best way to respond to broad international speculation, he said, adding that blocking the Council from launching such an investigation only raises suspicions that “something is hidden behind the scenes”.

The representative of Brazil emphasized that any proposal by a Council member must be considered in a respectful and objective manner. Noting that preliminary information from European authorities indicate that the Nord Stream incidents were an act of sabotage with the possible involvement of a State actor, he cited the importance of more comprehensive efforts on the United Nations part to understand the attack. He encouraged those responsible for ongoing national investigations to share their conclusions with the Council as soon as possible.

The representative of the United States, rejecting unfounded allegations about his country’s role in the act of sabotage on the Nord Stream pipeline, said the international community cannot tolerate damage to critical infrastructure. However, the text put forth by the Russian Federation was not an attempt to seek the truth, but rather to discredit the work of ongoing national investigations which might not reach conclusions that align with their predetermined narrative.

Switzerland’s delegate, noting her delegation’s abstention, echoed expressions of concern about the events at the Nord Stream pipelines and condemned such attacks against critical infrastructure. However, Denmark, Germany and Sweden are currently conducting national investigations to shed light on the facts of those events, she said, calling on the Council to wait for their results. Mandating an additional investigation would not be beneficial at this stage, she added.

The representative of Gabon, pointing out that Africa has hosted many international inquiries and independent experts over the years with implications for State sovereignty, said his delegation abstained because arguments about national investigations have routinely been ignored on his continent. “No one will accept these morality lessons anymore,” he stressed, declaring that today is “a good day for sovereignty of individual States, but a bad day for transparency and independence”.

Also speaking were the representatives of Ghana, Ecuador, Malta, Japan, United Kingdom, France, Albania and the United Arab Emirates.

The representatives of the Russian Federation and the United States took the floor several additional times.

The meeting began at 3:04 p.m. and ended at 3:52 p.m.

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15243.doc.htm

Ambassador Robert Wood
Alternate Representative for Special Political Affairs
New York, New York
March 27, 2023

AS DELIVERED

Thank you, Mr. President.

Let me begin by reiterating our deep concern regarding the sabotage that took place on the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines in September 2022. The United States categorically refutes Russia’s unfounded allegations leveled against us in relation to this act of sabotage. The United States was not involved in any way. Period.

As we have said previously, the international community cannot tolerate any deliberate actions to damage critical infrastructure.

However, let us be clear on what Russia’s draft resolution was, and what it was not. It was an attempt to discredit the work of ongoing national investigations and prejudice any conclusions they reach that do not comport to Russia’s predetermined and political narrative. It was not an attempt to seek the truth.

The competent national investigations by Sweden, Denmark, and Germany are proceeding in a comprehensive, transparent, and impartial manner. As many Council members have said, they must first be allowed to conclude. That is why we did not support this draft resolution and voted to abstain today.

We must ask why, despite having failed to make its case to the Council, Russia still chose to bring this resolution to a vote. It is difficult to accept Russia’s posturing that it only seeks an impartial, independent investigation.

Let it be clear for the record that the first draft of Russia’s resolution clearly implicated the United States, based on mischaracterizations of statements made by U.S. officials. The first draft criticized the investigations of other UN Member States. Over the course of many rounds of consultations, Russia failed to provide any credible new information to justify a UN investigation at this time.

I repeat: Russia has consistently sought to advance a political agenda based on unfounded accusations and predetermined culpability. Russia’s decision to call for a vote on a resolution that has such little support should make us all question what its true intent is.

UN resources for UN investigations should be preserved for scenarios where states fail or are unable to carry out genuine, impartial investigations. That is not the case today. We cannot allow Russia’s continued spurious allegations to distract this Council or unnecessarily divert the UN’s scarce resources from other pressing matters deserving of this Council’s attention and resources.

If Russia were truly committed to protecting civilian infrastructure, it would demonstrate this through its actions. Russia’s claim to be concerned over the sabotage of critical infrastructure belies the fact that Russia is relentlessly attacking its neighbor. It is striking cities and towns across Ukraine, damaging and destroying residential areas and medical facilities.

Russia’s attacks against Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure have left millions displaced, without power, and in need of humanitarian assistance.

Russia’s calls for accountability today ring hollow.

Thank you, Mr. President.

https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation- ... by-russia/

[Pants-of-dog]

"A large portion"? Certainly not on the scale of the Cold War.

Yes and no.

US and western neoimperialism and neocolonialism has not stopped since the end of the Cold War. In fact, it has increased, since there are no longer any resources being used to fight the Soviets.

Meanwhile, Soviet meddling has (of course) stopped, since the Soviet Union no longer exists.

Most of these acted through some sort of Cold War calculus. I can't even name one that wasn't, off the top of my head.

Not quite. Most were justified to the people as defending freedom from the ebil commies, but I am not discussing justifications. I am discussing actual Soviet influence. How many struggles can you name where you know there was significant Soviet influence?

Wishful thinking. The evidence doesn't bear out this conclusion, its more peaceful in every continent in the world, the only region that might be an exception is the middle east, which wasn't any more peaceful during the Cold War, and post-1989 has been driven by non-state actors who have also been attacking their own countries and neighbours.

Not really. The drug cartels making Mexico and Central America unsafe are doing so in a completely capitalist western framework after extensive unipolar influence from the USA.

MENA countries have been constantly attacked. Africa is not doing any getter than during the Cold war.

Even the current war in Ukraine was started by a European, capitalist, developed western nation.

[JohnRawls]

news

Only Russia, China and Brazil voted in favour of the Russian-drafted text on Monday, while the remaining 12 council members abstained. A resolution needs at least nine votes in favour and no vetoes by Russia, China, France, the United States or the United Kingdom to pass.

So apparently nobody in the world thinks that this warrants attention or investigation besides Russia(obviously), China(Okay, keep ruining relations with the rest of the world by supporting Russia) and Brazil (Not sure why Brazil voted for this).

The other non-permanent members right now are:

Albania (2023)
Brazil (2023)
Ecuador (2024)
Gabon (2023)
Ghana (2023)
Japan (2024)
Malta (2024)
Mozambique (2024)
Switzerland (2024)
United Arab Emirates (2023)

And besides Brazil all basically said Russia to fuck off.

[Rich]

Whatever. Where is your proof?

Spoken like a true Mafiosi. That's why the RICO act was introduced, because it was so often impossible to establish proof of a crime beyond reasonable doubt, under the normal rules of due process. Interestingly I think proof was going to be established to the required legal standard that the Saudi Arabian government officials and diplomats conspired in the 9/11 operation, which is why Obama shut the investigations down.

But that's the exception, in most of these international incidents legal standard proof can never be established. But then of course the question could be reversed. Where's the proof of all the things Putin is accused of? Most Liberals seem to think they're entitled to scream conspiracy theory at any argument they don't like, while they'll happily believe 10 of the most outrageous conspiracy theories before breakfast.

[JohnRawls]

Spoken like a true Mafiosi. That's why the RICO act was introduced, because it was so often impossible to establish proof of a crime beyond reasonable doubt, under the normal rules of due process. Interestingly I think proof was going to be established to the required legal standard that the Saudi Arabian government officials and diplomats conspired in the 9/11 operation, which is why Obama shut the investigations down.

But that's the exception, in most of these international incidents legal standard proof can never be established. But then of course the question could be reversed. Where's the proof of all the things Putin is accused of? Most Liberals seem to think they're entitled to scream conspiracy theory at any argument they don't like, while they'll happily believe 10 of the most outrageous conspiracy theories before breakfast.

Are you nuts? You are saying it is the US without any evidence, like real evidence. You presented Herches idea which was SMASHED to bits and he was exposed to be a liar at worst and conspiracy theorist at best.

So pardon me for not believing you on your stupid opinion on the subject. If you didn't present the conspiracy theory before then perhaps there would be something to discuss but you did and you pay the price for it.

Here is one thing that I will give you which is a bit Machiavellian in nature. There is no proof that Russia also did it besides circumstantial to the public at the very least. Germans didn't release their finding after all. But at the end of the day, we will make sure it is Russia and Russia will have to pay the money back. It is also way beneficial for Europe in the long run. So the long story short here is that Russia IS guilty and will pay the price.

[Unthinking Majority]

Not quite. Most were justified to the people as defending freedom from the ebil commies, but I am not discussing justifications. I am discussing actual Soviet influence. How many struggles can you name where you know there was significant Soviet influence?

Many conflicts in sub-saharan Africa, the middle east, Asia, and parts of Latin America. So in other words, every region not North America or Western Europe.

Not really. The drug cartels making Mexico and Central America unsafe are doing so in a completely capitalist western framework after extensive unipolar influence from the USA.

America and Canada generally don't support drug cartels, quite the opposite.

MENA countries have been constantly attacked. Africa is not doing any getter than during the Cold war.

Africa is still involved in civil conflicts, many of which rooted from the Cold War. Same with middle eastern countries. Look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran.

Even the current war in Ukraine was started by a European, capitalist, developed western nation.

Russia is not Western and not developed, its a dictatorship that perceives itself as an enemy of the West and has zero western allies and its leader is still trapped in a Cold War mentality. The entire western world is against Russia on their illegal aggression.

[late]

America and Canada generally don't support drug cartels, quite the opposite.

Minor point, while we don't support cartels, without the Drug War, they wouldn't exist.

[Unthinking Majority]

Minor point, while we don't support cartels, without the Drug War, they wouldn't exist.

Sure, they also wouldn't exist if d-bag gangs decided not to deal drugs and murder people and ruin the lives of countless addicts. They're responsible for their own actions.

The US government could easily enrich itself and American companies by legalizing hard drugs.

[late]

Sure, they also wouldn't exist if d-bag gangs decided not to deal drugs and murder people and ruin the lives of countless addicts. They're responsible for their own actions.

The US government could easily enrich itself and American companies by legalizing hard drugs.

Prohibition was also a failure, and that was when the Mafia got powerful.

There are a number of different ways to handle this, and still reduce the cartels. With any of them, fentanyl and the other killer street drugs will be gone. In any smart system, treatment will also be mandated.

We can also treat different drugs differently, since drugs like cocaine are so spectacularly bad.

Portugal has a smart system.

[Rich]

I favour shooting galleries. The number 1 priority should surely be to take the addict hard core out of the criminal economy. Their long term well being should be a secondary consideration.

[Unthinking Majority]

Prohibition was also a failure, and that was when the Mafia got powerful.

There are a number of different ways to handle this, and still reduce the cartels. With any of them, fentanyl and the other killer street drugs will be gone. In any smart system, treatment will also be mandated.

We can also treat different drugs differently, since drugs like cocaine are so spectacularly bad.

Portugal has a smart system.

American and Canadian laws can create incentives for these markets to go underground sure, but again nobody is forcing these people to traffic hard drugs, except maybe other gang members. Someone can't cry victim when they're a willing participant. By your logic we also have to blame the fools who buy and get addicted to these drugs in America and Canada for creating the market for it in the first place.

I really don't have much sympathy for hard drug users and drug traffickers, because only a fool would use or traffic drugs in the first place and they deserve their fates.

Sure I would probably dercriminalize it all to reduce the innocent bystanders getting hurt from these idiots and let Darwinism take its course for the users while offering them help if they want it. But this is pretty off-topic.

[late]

But this is pretty off-topic.

Perhaps, but it's the ONLY thing that will work.

[Rich]

But this is pretty off-topic.

Not entirely, the drug gang infested ghettos of the United States might not be entirely encouraging for Chinese people to leap into Liberal democracy. Failures of Liberal Democracies to deal with rampant crime have been one of authoritarianisms greatest selling points. The US government in WWII it should be noted collaborated with the Mafia both in the United States and in Italy. As I said before our overriding priority should be how to take the bulk of the drug money out of the criminal economy. Shooting galleries not only do this but can also help reduce the spread of drugs.

People say prohibition doesn't work, but decriminalisation and legalisation don't work either. At least until recently when discussing the Opium wars, a completely free unregulated market in drugs was seen a bad thing. Are we now saying the British were the good guys in The Opium wars?

[Pants-of-dog]

Many conflicts in sub-saharan Africa, the middle east, Asia, and parts of Latin America. So in other words, every region not North America or Western Europe.

After consulting declassified KGB archives, I know for a fact that many conflicts in Latin America that were supposedly about Soviet influence were, in fact, not about Soviet influence at all since the Soviets did almost nothing.

Since you seem to include these in your “knowledge” of events caused by Soviet influence, it seems that you incorrectly think that events were precipitated by Soviet influence when they were not.

This is why I asked you to name events where you know Soviet influence was involved.

America and Canada generally don't support drug cartels, quite the opposite.

Yes, we do. We are the ones buying all the product. All the cocaine and undocumented workers are sold to North Americans.

Africa is still involved in civil conflicts, many of which rooted from the Cold War. Same with middle eastern countries. Look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran.

Afghanistan and Iraq are either neoimperial vassals of the West, and became so after the Cold War ended. And Iran is obviously being targeted by the west, despite a complete lack of Soviet influence.

Russia is not Western and not developed, its a dictatorship that perceives itself as an enemy of the West and has zero western allies and its leader is still trapped in a Cold War mentality. The entire western world is against Russia on their illegal aggression.

Russia is western, and developed, and capitalist, and about as democratic as Florida (which is to say, not much at all, but still within the parameters of the USA),

Putin is definitely not trapped in a Cold War mentality. If you want to look at Russian history to see. where he draws his ideas from, look back to imperialist Russia. He is definitely a capitalist and has no plans on rebuilding the USSR.

Do you think Latin America is western?

[JohnRawls]

After consulting declassified KGB archives, I know for a fact that many conflicts in Latin America that were supposedly about Soviet influence were, in fact, not about Soviet influence at all since the Soviets did almost nothing.

Since you seem to include these in your “knowledge” of events caused by Soviet influence, it seems that you incorrectly think that events were precipitated by Soviet influence when they were not.

This is why I asked you to name events where you know Soviet influence was involved.



Yes, we do. We are the ones buying all the product. All the cocaine and undocumented workers are sold to North Americans.



Afghanistan and Iraq are either neoimperial vassals of the West, and became so after the Cold War ended. And Iran is obviously being targeted by the west, despite a complete lack of Soviet influence.



Russia is western, and developed, and capitalist, and about as democratic as Florida (which is to say, not much at all, but still within the parameters of the USA),

Putin is definitely not trapped in a Cold War mentality. If you want to look at Russian history to see. where he draws his ideas from, look back to imperialist Russia. He is definitely a capitalist and has no plans on rebuilding the USSR.

Do you think Latin America is western?

Iran is a special case, which requires its own topic. Iran was influenced by the USSR and then came under US sphere but then crazy Islamic revolution couped the US while sending a big fuck you to both USSR and US which doomed it to be under attack from both sides. If the Cold War ended the other way around then we would be seeing USSR sanctioning and attacking Iran. It has nothing to do with US, it has all to do with Iran being a major dick to all.

As for Cold War influence of both USSR and US in other countries. Both sides went overboard at supporting regimes which they thought are under influence of other countries. US provided covert assistance to places who they thought are being cooped by the USSR and even entervened directly. USSR did much of the same at the time. The timeframe is called the Cold War for a reason.

[Pants-of-dog]

And I am saying that the US (and possibly the USSR) not only engaged in neoimperialism to stop the other guys, but also engaged in neoimoerialism for its own enrichment, and just used the Soviets as an excuse.

And that this neoimperialism has continued unabated since the fall of the USSR.

[Rich]

Much of our ideals and values can be traced back to ancient Greece and ancient Republican Rome. Liberty and the opposition to tyranny. Although the Spartans were in many ways a million miles form our modern culture, even there there was a very strong emphasis on Constitutional checks and balances and repulsion of tyranny, of any one man wielding absolute power. Ironically it was the widows of Spartan citizens who actually got to enjoy the most liberty.

What about equality for all? Well even here the kernel of this ideal seems to originate from Plato, if not his predecessors. He notes that if death is the end, then the world is very unfair. He may have got the idea of a life after death from proto Hinduism, but in the West the idea of life after death would serve very different worldly purposes. Rebirth in Hinduism and Buddhism is an utterly reactionary idea. In the Hindu Buddhist world view there is no injustice in the world, none what so ever, or at least no permanent injustice, only temporary and effervescent. This is why the Shambala prophesies are so inspiring, where we take matters into our hands in this life and wreak vengeance upon our enemies.

In the past I feel may have put too much emphasis on the influence of Zoroastrianism, but we have been definitely been sold a lie and is referred to as Judaeo-Christian should really be called Platonic- Christianity. Of course none of this gives the Western Liberal any right to destroy Russia, just because he claims some cultural inheritance. In fact the Crimeans and those East Ukrainians who identify with Russia are very much in tradition of western liberty. When it comes to ethnic border disputes liberties often clash.

[JohnRawls]

And I am saying that the US (and possibly the USSR) not only engaged in neoimperialism to stop the other guys, but also engaged in neoimoerialism for its own enrichment, and just used the Soviets as an excuse.

And that this neoimperialism has continued unabated since the fall of the USSR.

I wouldn't say the US continued it much, it did have some scores to settle though after the Cold War which included Iraq and Iran. Although you can speculate that Iraq and Iran was because of the oil but I think that it had more to do with the fact that Iran basically said fuck you and continued to say fuck you to all while Saddam basically gassed the kurds when both USSR and US provided him weapons to attack Iran but never sanctioned the gassing. Iraqi attempt to destroy Kuwait didn't help Saddams case much also.

Then there are also cases of Lybia and Syria which are attributed to US for some reason but mostly it is European doing. France wanted to invade both Lybia and Syria. Turkey helped with Syria and US helped with Lybia. Turkey had its own goals in Syria while US seems to not have much of a choice after Germany pushed through the resolution.

What else is there? Yugoslavia? Well, it turned in to an ethnic cleansing so once again Europe got involved which dragged the US along on top of being an ethnic cleansing on NATO border basically.

Somalia? I have honestly no clue and never studied what happened in Somalia that much. So hard to say for me.

Perhaps there is an example of Venezuela but then again, the government itself fucked up there and started killing people, supressing opposition, nationalising a lot of industries so US sanctioned them. Not sure if this qualifies as neoimperealism. If it is then I can't explain the fact that US removed all sanctions on Venezuela at some point to stabilise relations but then Venezuela cracked down even more.