dagblog - Comments for "IT’S TIME FOR A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE ON RUSSIA"

See ya soon, then.

barefooted — Sat, 04 Aug 2018 20:26:59 +0000

In reply to Whew! I have to check out for

See ya soon, then.

Whew! I have to check out for

A Guy Called LULU — Sat, 04 Aug 2018 20:25:09 +0000

Whew! I have to check out for awhile but I will prime the pump by saying that to replace something "bad", if there might be anything "bad" about our policies then that "bad" has to be recognized as such. Balancing the scale may be too much to expect but tipping it in the right direction is worth shooting for.

Okay, Lulu. What's your

barefooted — Sat, 04 Aug 2018 20:12:03 +0000

In reply to IT’S TIME FOR A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE ON RUSSIA

Okay, Lulu. What's your prescription for fresh and new; a way to balance the scale while still keeping all the global balls in the air?

We're in toilet paper

barefooted — Sat, 04 Aug 2018 20:10:19 +0000

In reply to Glad we now understand each

We're in toilet paper territory ... move below.

Glad we now understand each

A Guy Called LULU — Sat, 04 Aug 2018 19:28:31 +0000

In reply to You're right, Lulu, that I

Glad we now understand each other better. On the question of "where's today?" My answer to that along with evidence I have presented supporting my answer to that question quite a few times is what has pissed a few people off. In the particular area of foreign policy I say we are right where we have been for a long time.

To try to answer your last question in short form and in keeping with your closing metaphor, I say that no fresh thing will come from the same old mold. I would like to see that old mold broken and a fresh one introduced for a new product appropriate to new time.

You're right, Lulu, that I

barefooted — Sat, 04 Aug 2018 00:23:56 +0000

In reply to Barefooted, You were talking

You're right, Lulu, that I was largely writing directly to you, and though I didn't intend it to be the case your assumption that I was, in effect, calling you foolish is fair. I apologize for not making myself clear, since I did indeed mean it as a generalization.

However, I also wrote this:

My questions, Lulu, end up following the flow of what Peracles, arta and others have put to you: where's today?

Within the prism of yesterday, is there any room to separate today from it? I acknowledge that the past is necessary for understanding the present - honestly, everyone with a brain does - and will hopefully advise the future. But is there any room for the idea of something fresh? I don't know, maybe a chance of breaking the mold without forgetting what created the thing?

Barefooted, You were talking

A Guy Called LULU — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 23:53:25 +0000

In reply to Ignoring or forgetting the

Barefooted, You were talking directly to me in your comment which was to say why my way of addressing what I believe to be an ongoing important issue was frustrating to you. It began; "This is part of what I find so frustrating about what you write - ". Because you were talking directly to me about frustration with what I write, I took all of your comment in that paragraph to be directed at me or to be referring to me, not as at an abstracted idea that would be a mistake for anybody even if that were also true. Your final sentence speaking directly to me says: "Ignoring or forgetting the past is foolhardy, immersing oneself in it is foolish". Excuse me for thinking that the underlined quote referred to me if I am mistaken. I took the statement as suggesting that I am being foolish for being emersed in the past.

In my reply I was simply disagreeing with that conclusion, as I saw it, and saying instead that I was noting the flow of events from the known past and how they got us to the present and that I did not agree that I was being foolish to do so. I had no intention to misrepresent what you said.

Ignoring or forgetting the

barefooted — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 20:39:20 +0000

In reply to Thanks for the polite

Ignoring or forgetting the past is foolhardy; immersing oneself in it is foolish.

That's what I wrote, Lulu. Where in that do you read that I suggest "noting the history and timeline of historical events" is equivalent to immersing oneself in the past?

Thanks for the polite

A Guy Called LULU — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 02:52:17 +0000

In reply to Regarding your quoted piece,

Thanks for the polite correction. I know the difference but had a brain fart after typing "Max". I am on a bad roll regarding details. I accidently conflated two closely related articles on the same subject from the home page of Grey Zone. This is the article with the interview with Ortega. The article I misidentified inn my comment is related and is important to the subject and This takes you again to that article in which Waddel is shown to brag of setting up what he called an insurrection in Nicaragua and it is also from 2018 but has a lot of older history, as you noted, to support its case.

P.S. to add that I disagree that noting the history and timeline of historical events that brought us to a place today where an "insurrection", or at least an attempted one deliberately promoted by our country and going on as we speak, is to foolishly immerse oneself in the past.

Regarding your quoted piece,

barefooted — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 01:34:54 +0000

In reply to Thanks bareooted for this

Regarding your quoted piece, it isn't Max Boot, it's by Max Blumenthal. I read it, and the links - many of which are from the Washington Post going back years - including one from David Ignatius in 1991. My questions, Lulu, end up following the flow of what Peracles, arta and others have put to you: where's today?

eta: This is part of what I find so frustrating about what you write - there's a disconnect between what you clearly and strongly believe the US has been doing for decades and what your travels in the present and the nuances of the people who live in it tell you. Of course the US is a world-wide player, and of course other countries are, as well (read: Russia, China, etc.). No reasonable person disputes that that fact has both good and bad implications on the global citizenry and economy, even as the same reasonable people realize that with time comes change, and every change creates new realities and possibilities. Ignoring or forgetting the past is foolhardy; immersing oneself in it is foolish.