Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,485 Year: 3,742/9,624 Month: 613/974 Week: 226/276 Day: 2/64 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The War in Europe
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 158 of 995 (892366)
03-06-2022 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Theodoric
03-04-2022 8:41 PM


Re: If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
Troll.
At least LNA is not trying to charge us for his translations from the original Russian, ну?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Theodoric, posted 03-04-2022 8:41 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 211 of 995 (892445)
03-07-2022 11:44 AM


Send the Russian Troops After the Real Nazis
Russian soldiers captured/defected in Ukraine say that they were told they were sent in to protect the Ukrainians from Nazi occupation.
If they really want to fight Nazis, direct them to the Kremlin. Or to CPAC. Or to a Trump rally.

Forrest Gump: "Nazi is as Nazi does."

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Tanypteryx, posted 03-07-2022 11:59 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 311 of 995 (892686)
03-12-2022 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 309 by Theodoric
03-12-2022 10:42 AM


Re: I will take up this call
Why did you go with the Tzar spelling?
Of course, the only proper spelling is "Царь".
There are four different ways to transliterate the letter "Ц". "Tzar" is one of four possible transliterations from Cyrillics, which Wikipedia.en gives as: "Tsar (/zɑːr, sɑːr/ or /tsɑːr/), also spelled czar, tzar, or csar".
 
Similarly, consider the Russian composer, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (Пётр Ильи́ч Чайко́вский). His last name starts with the letter, "Ч", whose sound is like the English "ch" as in "check" and the Spanish letter, "ch" as in "chalupa" (yes, Spanish dictionaries treat it as a single letter). And Italian also has the sound which is a "soft c" followed by and "e" or "i" (eg, "ciao!").
Other languages might not have that sound and so need to find some other way to write it. Like the "Ц", the "Ч (our "ch" sound) is an affricate, the combination of two different consonant sounds (slightly basdardized): eg, "Ц" = /ts/, "Ч" = /tŠ/ (Š is like our "sh" sound). Hence languages like French and German have to write it as a combination of two letters, namely "t" combined with their way of writing our "sh" sound: eg, French "ch" -> "tch", German "sch" -> "tsch".
Therefore "Чайко́вский" gets transliterated as:
  • in French -- "Tchaikovski" or "Tchaïkovsky"
  • in German -- "Tschaikowsky" or "Tschaikowski"
  • in Italian -- "Čajkovskij", but also "Ciajkovskij", "Ciaikovski", or the French "Tchaikovsky".
  • in Spanish -- "Chaikovski"
  • in English -- "Chaikovski", but we frequently use the French.
Added to the problems of transliteration we have our off-the-wall English "phonetic spellings" which only serve to confuse language students (especially due to English vowels being radically different from everybody elses'). Therefore, I always prefer to refer back to the original for pronunciation.
 
Just for fun, consider the English "j" (eg, "jungle"). In English it's also an affricate (/dž/, a voiced "ch"--/tš/), but in French it's a pure sound (/&zcaron/). So the German word for "jungle" is written "Dschungel"; the French just discard the "d" sound and change it to a pure /ž/, hence "jungle".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by Theodoric, posted 03-12-2022 10:42 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


(1)
Message 352 of 995 (892899)
03-17-2022 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by ringo
03-17-2022 11:59 AM


Re: Two Poignant Videos
Phat writes:
Trump is itching to become a Western Leader again.
I doubt that. He likes the attention but he doesn't like people constantly wanting him to do things.
Of course, Phat's statement begs the question of whether Trump has ever deserved being considered a leader, especially since he was doing the bidding of his master, Putin. The general staff of the German Army said of their Kaiser Wilhelm II, arguably an eerily prescient pre-saging of Trump, that he couldn’t lead three soldiers over a gutter, but even there Kaiser Bill's leadership skills far outshone Trump's.
But besides Trump's pathological need for constant attention and ego fluffing, Trump's "running" for the Presidency is motivated by two very important factors:
  1. Trump's desperate need for protection from facing the consequenced for his many criminal activities. Which is to say that his loss of protection under that now-infamous OLC (Office of Legal Counsel) memo has him terrified (A Sitting President 's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222, 222, 260 (2000) (OLC Op.).). From Volume II, Page 1, Section "INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME II" of the Mueller Report:
    quote:
    First ... The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."
    ...
    3 OLC Op. at 257 n.36 ("A grand jury could continue to gather evidence throughout the period of immunity").
    4 OLC Op. at 255 ("Recognizing an immunity from prosecution for a sitting President would not preclude such prosecution once the President's term is over or he is otherwise removed from office by resignation or impeachment").
    Mueller cited that OLC memo as the reason why he could not seek Trump's indictment for his many acts of obstruction in the investigation, ten of which he detailed in Volume II of the report. He hinted to Congress that they are the ones empowered to take action on that report, presumably by impeaching Trump for obstruction of justice, but instead Congress impeached Trump for extorting President Zelenskyy for personal political gain.
    Historical note: That OLC memo was one of two memos in response to two questions from Pres. Nixon. VP Agnew had just resigned immediately before being arrested for corruption (he had been informed of his imminent arrest and resigned in order to not taint the office of VP). Also having been involved in that bribe-taking, Nixon asked the OLC whether a sitting president could be indicted or prosecuted. The OLC counseled no. Nixon also asked whether he could pardon himself. The OLC counseled no, since he'd be acting as his own judge which is impermissible. Please note that one of Trump's first questions in office was whether he could pardon himself, which proved that at least on rare occasions Trump was indeed able to plan ahead.
    While in office Trump abused that OLC memo constantly to avoid the consequences of his persistent criminal activity. Now he no longer has that protection and he misses it sorely. He wants to have that protection again, so if he could regain the Presidency he would love for that to happen.
  2. Trump wants to milk his cash cows for as long as he possibly can. Even during the 2016 campaign, even the most casual observer could clearly see that Trump was using his campaign to enrich himself. Campaign contributions went to leasing office space in Trump properties, paying Trump-run caterers and other services, etc. That included "office spaces" in abandoned Trump properties that nobody ever went to. Those campaign contributions also served as conduits for bribes paid to Trump; several of the appointments he made were for large contributors (eg, Gordon Sondland whose $1 million campaign contribution bought him the ambassadorship to the EU, which involved him in the Trump–Ukraine scandal and required him to testify at the impeachment trial, which in turn resulted in Trump firing him two days after Trump's acquittal).
    We also observed that Trump registered for re-election at the soonest possible time so that he could keep his campaign cash cow lactating copiously for him. Keep that money flowing in. Keep open that money-laundering conduit for bribes. His hotels also served as conduits for bribes as special interest groups (eg, Saudi Arabia) would reserve large blocks of rooms at Trump's hotels and then not even use them (or else offer them as a huge freebie for veterans to come to Washington and demonstrate against legislation that the Saudis wanted to defeat). And we won't even cover here how Trump funneled millions of government dollars into his properties with his golf trips to his own resorts (for which we had to pay full price for his Secret Service entourage to be there), requiring military flights to overnight at his overseas properties, etc. Or how tens of millions of dollars are still unaccounted for from his Inaugural fund (last I heard). Or how a huge chunk of his $1 billion 2020 campaign fund mysteriously disappeared (though in this case it appears that he had been grifted by grifters that he had hired).
    Trump's "Stop the Steal" lie is being monetized through his America First PAC et alia -- ironically, stopping the steal is exactly what we were able to accomplish. But he's appealing to contributors to donate to their legal fund to fight the election results (what he falsely calls "stopping the steal"), plus I'm sure that they're contributing for his anticipated 2024 run (and now to buy him a new jet, etc) along with him supporting other Repugnians' mid-term runs. But the way that's set up only about 30% of money raised goes to the GOP and 70% goes to Trump to use however he sees fit including for personal purposes.
    Not only is that a huge cash cow for Trump, but only about 40% of the money received goes to its purposes. Every single charity or PAC bears a cost, overhead that must be paid before the remaining money can be used for the charity's work. You need to have a staff to handle the office work; eg, to print requests for donations, to stuff envelopes and mail them, to process incoming mail, to track donations, etc. I've heard the term "cost of funding", but it's also known by other terms. In normal charities that accounts for about 15% of all money donated, but it can creep up to 20% and still be valid. If the "cost of funding" get much higher, then that can be an indication of money being siphoned off; I heard of a nationwide charity whose "cost of funding" was 90% which just screams that it was a scam (I don't remember the name so I will not suggest what it could be). In the case of Trump's PAC, the "cost of funding" was given as 61%, which tells us that someone is siphoning away nearly half the donations without leaving a trace -- to borrow from the famous Kurt Weill song, "Could that someone be Don the Trump?".
So Trump's motivation to be President again is not to serve, since that would make him a sucker. Rather, he has three basic motivations:
  1. His need to have his ego constantly fluffed. Balance that with his aversion to being exposed as a loser.
  2. His need to escape prosecution for his lifetime filled with so very many crimes.
  3. His greed for all the money that he can grift out of suckers.
 
So will Trump actually run for President again? Only if he is absolutely assured of winning, since his fragile ego could not survive losing yet again.
Rather, I predict that he will lead his followers along as long as he possibly can, misleading them into believing that he is going to run until the last possible moment. We've seen him do that kind of thing before. And as long as his followers think that he will run, they will continue to send him money, so he will milk them, that cash cow, for all the money he possibly can.
Just the other day I saw an article where some group is suing Trump for not announcing his candidacy but rather leading his followers on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by ringo, posted 03-17-2022 11:59 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 759 of 995 (894089)
04-30-2022 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 758 by Omnivorous
04-30-2022 12:10 PM


Re: "Don't get cocky, kid."
I don't know whether it's their official name, but the Ukrainian Foreign Legion is accepting veterans with combat experience and who are physically fit. 60-year-old Senior Chief Malcolm Nance has volunteered and is serving with them now:
quote:
On 18 April 2022, Nance revealed that he had joined the International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine in March 2022.
That Wikipedia page on the Legion says that they're more than 20,000 strong. Also that they're getting volunteers with no prior military and have had to sort that out ("On April 1, 2022, Ukraine announced that recruitment will be temporarily halted in order to sort out volunteers who don't have any military background").
And Malcolm Nance's decades of work in the intelligence community included a concentration on Russian activity. He also speaks Russian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 758 by Omnivorous, posted 04-30-2022 12:10 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 760 by Omnivorous, posted 04-30-2022 1:55 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 841 of 995 (895605)
07-07-2022 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 840 by Tangle
07-07-2022 5:05 PM


Re: The War Drags On
Real politic tends be tricky.
Sorry, but do you mean Realpolitik?
quote
Realpolitik (German: [ʁeˈaːlpoliˌtiːk]; from German real 'realistic, practical, actual', and Politik 'politics') refers to enacting or engaging in diplomatic or political policies based primarily on considerations of given circumstances and factors, rather than strictly binding itself to explicit ideological notions or moral and ethical premises. In this respect, it shares aspects of its philosophical approach with those of realism and pragmatism. It is often simply referred to as pragmatism in politics, e.g. "pursuing pragmatic policies" or "realistic policies".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 840 by Tangle, posted 07-07-2022 5:05 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 842 by Tangle, posted 07-08-2022 3:01 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024