YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #humor #history #ai #artificialintelligence #automotiveengineering
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Day mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
News Feed (Home) Popular Posts Events Blog Market Forum
Media
Go LIVE! Headline News VidWatch Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore Offers
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Group

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Nixon‚ Not Kissinger‚ Was the Architect of ‘Detente’
Favicon 
spectator.org

Nixon‚ Not Kissinger‚ Was the Architect of ‘Detente’

In a lengthy and important essay in Foreign Affairs about “detente” with the Soviet Union‚ historian Niall Ferguson‚ who is completing the second-volume of his biography of Henry Kissinger‚ mentions Richard Nixon just once. And the photographs accompanying the article show Kissinger with President Gerald Ford‚ not Nixon. Yet‚ as Kissinger himself has sometimes acknowledged‚ the real architect of “detente” with the Soviet Union was not Kissinger; it was Richard Nixon. Ferguson may be too sanguine in his belief that the ’70s version of detente might work with China. As Nixon’s top foreign policy adviser‚ Kissinger‚ of course‚ played a large role in the formulation and implementation of detente‚ and Ferguson as Kissinger’s biographer quite naturally focuses on the diplomat’s role and subsequent perspective on that policy. But it is a historical stretch to claim‚ as Ferguson does‚ that Kissinger “pioneered what would become his signature policy: the easing of tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States.” It was Nixon‚ not Kissinger‚ who “pioneered” the policy of detente‚ and detente was not Kissinger’s “signature policy”; it was Nixon’s. (READ MORE from Frank P. Sempa: Bob Costas’ Definition of ‘Disgraceful’: Trump) Kissinger characterized Nixon’s pattern of thinking about foreign policy as “seminal.” Nixon approached foreign policy in grand strategic terms and based his decisions on a comprehensive global worldview. Kissinger concurred with that approach‚ but as he consistently acknowledged‚ in the shaping and implementation of foreign policy the final decision was always Nixon’s. Anyone who doubts this need only read some of Nixon’s post-presidential books‚ including his memoirs‚ RN‚ which are unparalleled among U.S. presidents for their strategic insights and foreign policy analyses. They are comparable to Kissinger’s own books in their interpretations of international affairs. Ferguson’s essay most likely draws on the research for his forthcoming second-volume of the Kissinger biography‚ which will deal with Kissinger’s life and career from 1969‚ when he became Nixon’s national security adviser‚ to his death this past November. Like Nixon‚ Kissinger’s post-government career included numerous books and articles that informed and explained international politics from both historical and contemporary perspectives. And like Nixon‚ Kissinger’s contributions to the understanding of American foreign policy continued almost until his last days.  Ferguson’s essay is a nuanced assessment of detente. Detente was not the surrender to the Soviets that some on the far right claimed. Nor was detente a version of the 1930’s appeasement policy that other conservative critics claimed at the time. Instead‚ it was one aspect of Nixon’s triangular diplomacy that sought to position the United States closer to the Soviet Union and China than either communist power was to each other. Combined with the opening to China‚ detente sought to exploit the widening Sino-Soviet split to America’s geopolitical benefit. And it worked. During the 1970s and 1980s‚ China became a de facto ally of the United States vis-a-vis the Soviet Union. As Ferguson notes‚ detente accomplished this without triggering a world war. Detente’s nadir was in the late 1970s‚ when the Carter administration pursued it with abandon despite what the Soviets called the shift in the “correlation of forces” in their favor. Both Nixon and Kissinger criticized Carter’s version of detente and applauded Ronald Reagan’s “peace through strength” approach in the 1980s that‚ however‚ included aspects of the Nixon-Kissinger detente policy. I vividly recall watching (on television) the recently sworn-in President Ronald Reagan descending the stairs of Air Force One clutching a copy of Nixon’s book The Real War. (READ MORE: Global Order and Stability Are More Important Than Democracy) Ferguson believes that the hard-headed detente of the early 1970s might work to deter China from attacking Taiwan and avoid war between the U.S. and China. But he notes that today the “correlation of forces is a good deal more favorable for Beijing than it ever was for Moscow.” Not only is China a more multi-dimensional challenger today than the USSR was in the 1970s‚ but back then China for its own selfish reasons helped the United States balance Soviet power on the Eurasian landmass. Today‚ through diplomatic errors extending back to the Clinton administration‚ China and Russia are closer to each other than either of them are to the United States.  Ferguson may be too sanguine in his belief that the ’70s version of detente might work with China. And it is doubtful that the foreign policy practitioners in the Biden administration could pull it off. There are no Nixons or Kissingers in the corridors of power at the White House. What Kissinger wrote in his book Diplomacy about Nixon is still true today: “No American president possessed a greater knowledge of international affairs.” Nixon‚ Kissinger noted‚ “had an uncanny ability to grasp the political dynamics of any country that had seized his attention.” Nixon’s understanding of geopolitical realities‚” Kissinger continued‚ “was truly remarkable.” He possessed‚ in Kissinger’s view‚ “powerful analytical skills and extraordinary geopolitical intuition [that] were always crisply focused on the American interest.”  Ferguson’s essay in some respects repeats the errors of those historians and scholars who credited Secretary of State John Foster Dulles for formulating and implementing the foreign policy of the Eisenhower administration‚ when in fact Eisenhower was in charge the whole time. It wasn’t until scholars like R. Gordon Hoxie and Fred Greenstein wrote revisionist works about the Eisenhower presidency that we appreciated Ike’s impressive geopolitical achievements. Kissinger clearly played a key role in formulating and shaping the detente policy in the early 1970s — but it was Nixon’s policy‚ and it is Nixon who deserves the most credit for its achievements.  The post Nixon‚ Not Kissinger‚ Was the Architect of ‘Detente’ appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

An ‘October Surprise’ from ‘New’ Ukraine Is Possible
Favicon 
spectator.org

An ‘October Surprise’ from ‘New’ Ukraine Is Possible

How does the Ukraine-Russia war end? In an October surprise. Ukraine‚ which became independent on 24 August 1991‚ will be dissolved and a New Ukraine will come into being by virtue of a unilateral declaration by the present Government of Ukraine‚ with the support of the military high command. The de jure boundaries of New Ukraine will reflect and be co-terminus with the territory currently under the de facto administrative control of the present Government of Ukraine.  New Ukraine will be compact; cohesive and well-integrated politically‚ economically‚ and socially (i.e.‚ ethnically‚ linguistically‚ and culturally); and will have demonstrably defensible borders.  Accordingly‚ New Ukraine will have the strategic autonomy to decouple from Russia’s sphere of influence without joining economic and military blocs such as the EU and NATO. Setting the Stage The fall of the city of Bakhmut in Donetsk province of eastern Ukraine in May 2023 signaled the end of major Russian offensive military operations in Ukraine.  Since the capture of Bakhmut‚ the focus has been on securing the Russian Federation’s southwestern flank: tactical nuclear weapons under Russian regular army control have been moved into Belarus‚ and  fresh‚ well-trained troops are entrenched in highly-visible‚ carefully prepared‚ defensive positions across the entire swathe of territories of eastern Ukraine currently under Russian control: Crimea‚ Kherson‚ Zaporizhzhia‚ Donetsk‚ and Luhansk.  Importantly‚ there are no indications of a major new Russian offensive to gain additional strategically important Ukrainian controlled territory‚ such as the port of Odessa on the Black Sea.  Tactical attacks designed to straighten out Russian defensive lines and divert Ukrainian forces from their main counteroffensive operations do not change the strategic status quo. [T]he central question is “which Ukraine” would be outside the sphere of influence of Russia.   Simply put‚ from a realpolitik perspective‚ Russia has achieved its necessary and sufficient vital national security objectives with respect to its southwestern flank by virtue of the earlier takeover and annexation of Crimea and the strategically vital naval base of Sevastopol in March 2014‚ and the subsequent annexation (September 2022) and conquest (over the February 2022 – May 2023 period) of portions of Kherson‚ Zaporizhzhia‚ Donetsk‚ and Luhansk provinces to form a robust cordon sanitaire to protect Crimea. (READ MORE from Samir Tata: Coca-Cola Faces a Challenge in Its China Market) Moreover‚ per the International Monetary Fund (IMF)‚ the Russian economy grew by 3 percent in 2023 and is expected to grow by 2.6 and 1.1 percent in 2024 and 2025 respectively‚ which is comparable to U.S. growth rates over the same period and far better than the economic performance of Germany. The challenge for Russia is to safeguard its hard-won national security gains and have the strategic patience to allow the Government of Ukraine to recognize that pursuing the military path is a dead end. The Kabuki Theater of Ukraine’s Counteroffensive The Government of Ukraine launched its much-heralded counteroffensive in June 2023. Within three months it became clear that the counteroffensive is more bark than bite — Kabuki theater aimed at not so much recapturing the extensive lost territory and restoring the pre-March 2014 territorial status quo as escaping from the limbo of unfulfilled promises of eventual EU and NATO membership. The Declaration of the 2023 NATO Summit of July 11-12 in Vilnius confirmed that Ukraine was confronted with two sets of “Catch-22s” that ensured its membership status would remain in limbo for the foreseeable future.  First‚ NATO members encouraged Ukraine’s use of military force to regain the territories seized by Russia and restore the pre-March 2014 territorial status quo.  However‚ while Ukraine is engaged in a military conflict‚ no consideration can be given to possible membership in NATO. Second‚ even in the absence of military conflict‚ there is no agreement among NATO members that Ukraine has satisfied all of the requirements for membership‚ and furthermore‚ there is no agreement among NATO members with respect to the expected timeframe within which Ukraine would meet membership requirements. It is reasonable to assume that Ukraine will be confronted with a similar set of “Catch-22s” with respect to its prospective membership in the European Union. As early as August 2023 senior leadership at NATO‚ at least informally‚ suggested that the emergence of a downsized New Ukraine would be welcomed.  On November 1‚ 2023 in an interview and accompanying article‚ General Valery Zaluzhny‚ then head of the Ukraine military high command‚ acknowledged the harsh military reality — stalemate. The Ukrainian political process of adjusting to a new reality is unfolding among the “troika” of the Rada (parliament)‚ Presidency‚ and military high command — so an “October surprise” may be brewing.  The unilateral declaration of a New Ukraine will reflect the troika’s consensus. The Realpolitik of Partition Clearly‚ what matters from Russia’s perspective is “which Ukraine” would fall outside the penumbra of the sphere of influence of the Russian Federation.  As suggested by Vladimir Putin in his seminal speech in 2008 at NATO’s Summit in Bucharest‚ Ukraine as it was then constituted would break apart if there was a serious attempt to accept the invitation to join the military alliance. As Putin pointed out in the same speech‚ the core territories of western Ukraine were carved out of Poland and incorporated into an expanded Ukraine in 1939.  Eastern Ukraine (Crimea and the strategically vital portions of Kherson‚ Zaporizhzhia‚ Donetsk‚ and Luhansk provinces) is now under de facto Russian control. A unilateral declaration of a downsized New Ukraine is unlikely to encounter a Russian objection. (READ MORE: Ukraine’s Moment of Reckoning) Likewise‚ for the Government of Ukraine the central question is “which Ukraine” would be outside the sphere of influence of Russia.  In fact‚ since 2015‚ IMF programs for Ukraine have not included eastern Ukraine within their ambit. As the 2015 IMF staff report on Ukraine acknowledged: “The divergence between the east and the rest of Ukraine appears to reflect the limited direct interregional linkages.”  The report also notes that western Ukraine was the main beneficiary of the waiver of EU tariffs.  So‚ in economic terms‚ the rest of Ukraine was better off without eastern Ukraine in 2015 and since then the economic linkages between the two regions are de minimis.  Arguably‚ a soft partition of Ukraine has been the de facto reality‚ so the declaration of New Ukraine would constitute de jure recognition of this reality.   The post An ‘October Surprise’ from ‘New’ Ukraine Is Possible appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

Exclusive — Peter Schweizer: Fentanyl a ‘Chinese Operation Much More than It Is a Mexican Drug Cartel Operation’
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

Exclusive — Peter Schweizer: Fentanyl a ‘Chinese Operation Much More than It Is a Mexican Drug Cartel Operation’

by Hannah Bleau Knudsen‚ Breitbart: Fentanyl is a “Chinese operation much more than it is a Mexican drug cartel operation‚” Peter Schweizer‚ author of Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans‚ said during an appearance on Breitbart News Saturday. Schweizer‚ president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) and senior contributor at […]
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

Fourth-Generation Arizona Rancher Says He Has Found 17 Dead Bodies‚ Rape Trees‚ Illegal Aliens Crawling on His Property (VIDEO)
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

Fourth-Generation Arizona Rancher Says He Has Found 17 Dead Bodies‚ Rape Trees‚ Illegal Aliens Crawling on His Property (VIDEO)

by Jim Hoft‚ The Gateway Pundit: Joe Biden’s America. A fourth-generation Arizona rancher who owns 1‚600 acres of land that spans 10.5 miles along the southern border said he has found 17 dead bodies‚ rape trees‚ and illegal aliens crawling on his property. John Ladd‚ 68‚ has been outspoken about Biden’s border crisis over the […]
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

Biden’s Disapproval Rating Soars to 59 Percent‚ Trump’s Lead Biggest Yet
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

Biden’s Disapproval Rating Soars to 59 Percent‚ Trump’s Lead Biggest Yet

by Mish Shedlock‚ Mish Talk: In the latest New York Times/Siena Poll Trump has his biggest lead over Biden ever. And Biden’s disapproval rating is a whopping 59 percent. I list 18 key points from the poll. The Big Change Nate Cohn‚ New York Times chief political analyst notes The Big Change Between the 2020 and […]
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

STUDY FINDS MAJORITY OF PATIENTS WITH “LONG COVID” WERE VACCINATED…SURPRISE SURPRISE 🙄
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

STUDY FINDS MAJORITY OF PATIENTS WITH “LONG COVID” WERE VACCINATED…SURPRISE SURPRISE 🙄

from Press For Truth:  TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

Blaze Media Investigative Journalist  @TPC4USA  has now been taken into FBI custody for his J6 reporting
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

Blaze Media Investigative Journalist @TPC4USA has now been taken into FBI custody for his J6 reporting

Blaze Media Investigative Journalist @TPC4USA has now been taken into FBI custody for his J6 reporting Watch: pic.twitter.com/OF9WVh26ER — TheBlaze (@theblaze) March 1‚ 2024
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

America’s Being a Dictatorship‚ Not a Democracy‚ Has Now Become Obvious
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

America’s Being a Dictatorship‚ Not a Democracy‚ Has Now Become Obvious

by Eric Zuesse‚ The Duran: One thing that a democracy never does it to participate in a genocide‚ but today’s America is doing it. Never before (except perhaps regarding its own Indians in the 1800s) has the U.S. Government participated in a genocide‚ but ever since at least October 16th when both Egypt and Jordan […]
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y ·Youtube Politics

YouTube
They Could Have Had A Real Border Security Act But . . .
Like
Comment
Share
Bikers Den
Bikers Den
1 y ·Youtube General Interest

YouTube
Pretty damn sweet trike! 👍
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 65644 out of 84348
  • 65640
  • 65641
  • 65642
  • 65643
  • 65644
  • 65645
  • 65646
  • 65647
  • 65648
  • 65649
  • 65650
  • 65651
  • 65652
  • 65653
  • 65654
  • 65655
  • 65656
  • 65657
  • 65658
  • 65659
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund