[ericmay]

It’s going much better than even the most optimistic assessment. I fail to see how selling more American weapons (many of which are being given away?) is more economically advantageous than like, not having a destroyed Ukraine. Maybe you can walk me further through the logic here. Who is making these decisions? Was it Trump when he fought to get Nordstrom’s 2 cancelled? Or is it Biden? Or…?

[jessaustin]

Even those weapons that are "given away" are first purchased by USA taxpayers. This whole dynamic was observed long ago by Eisenhower. Probably he could have done something to resist it, but puppets like Trump and Biden have very little say in the matter. The most they can do is pick among options when TPTB suffer from a lack of unanimity: see our pathetic withdrawal from Afghanistan. The last guy who really stood up to this, got shot in Dallas.

A stable prospering Ukraine is of no more value to the actual decision makers than a stable prospering DR Congo.

[ericmay]

Well then there isn’t much to do nor any reason to care is there?

> see our pathetic withdrawal from Afghanistan

Eh withdrawal was fine. Needed to get out of their ASAP. A little chaotic but the military (woah Biden made the MIC do something they didn’t want to do???!) didn’t think he’d actually order them out since everyone has talked about it for years and they were too far invested to cut their losses.

But sure. The Us wants to sell more weapons. So does Russia. The Russian MIC started the war so Putin would have to buy and upgrade equipment. So there ya have it.

[jessaustin]

...ASAP...

This leads one to suspect trolling. The withdrawal was pathetic because it didn't take place two decades earlier, after ObL left Afghanistan. Also, because it has been followed by the "asset freeze" and associated starve-the-children policy.

Russia isn't led by its MIC; it is led by the dictator that USA installed. Putin, who came to power via USA manipulation, is now opposed by USA manipulation. In this, he takes his place on a long list of world leaders:

Victoriano Huerta, Raoul Cédras, Jean-Bertrand Aristide (actually democratically elected, but later removed and reinstalled numerous times in some weird Clintonian game), Augusto Pinochet, Suharto, Rafael Trujillo, Saddam Hussein, Mobutu Sese Seko, Ngo Dinh Diem, Dương Văn Minh, Nguyễn Khánh, Fernando Romeo Lucas García

I'm probably missing a lot here. Especially I think there are many African leaders who could be added to this list. If the fondest dreams of CIA reptiles come true and they somehow manage to replace Putin with some other awful person, we can be sure that eventual opposition to that person's rule will fuel even more sales of armaments.

[ericmay]

> This leads one to suspect trolling.

I can safely clear that suspicion.

> The withdrawal was pathetic because it didn't take place two decades earlier, after ObL left Afghanistan. Also, because it has been followed by the "asset freeze" and associated starve-the-children policy.

I don't follow this chain of reasoning. Bin Laden left Afghanistan for Pakistan, the closest realistic staging area was Afghanistan (if you're going to attack this from a "get Bin Laden" angle).

> Russia isn't led by its MIC; it is led by the dictator that USA installed. Putin, who came to power via USA manipulation, is now opposed by USA manipulation. In this, he takes his place on a long list of world leaders:

Speaking of trolling...

If the US is so powerful that it can easily install whoever it wants as a puppet leader in any country, including Russia, then you should go grab a beer and relax and just enjoy your life because there is nothing you can do and nothing for you to be concerned with. The US is all-powerful and all-seeing.

Alternatively, you can not peddle very ridiculous conspiracy theories and not waste my time.