Trump or Biden?

@salmon_rushdie said in #81:
> "McGovern's post-retirement work includes commenting for RT and Sputnik News, among other outlets,"
>
> So he's a straight up Russian propaganda asset now lmao
>
> No wonder he's just towing the party line,
>
> Le yawn

This is just ad hominem nonsense intended to distract from McGovern's actual points.

Lets go Trump!

Biden should resign and make a team on lichess while he smokes his weed

@LordSupremeChess I have no idea but Biden is a world leader in that discipline.

@Cassiodorus1 said in #91:
> This is just ad hominem nonsense intended to distract from McGovern's actual points.
No it goes to show after his treatment in the early 2000s with more rational approaches, he was willing to sell his integrity for a paycheck from the Russian govt as it became a personal vendetta to say what they want him to say after he felt left behind by his own country which no doubt deepened the antipathy as he made the intelligence community in the US his enemy.

Happens to all sorts of ex-intelligence folks who often end up switching sides because the home team tends to brush off the old so callously

@Cassiodorus1 said in #85:
> As he said, there was actually some sort of backchannel conversation going on back in the day. Either it's just that Ray McGovern doesn't know of any backchannel conversation going on now, or it doesn't exist.
>
> Oh, and Ray McGovern is "some guy":
>
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_McGovern
>
> "McGovern was a CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990, and in the 1980s chaired National Intelligence Estimates and prepared the President's Daily Brief. "

He doesn't know of any back channel since he stopped being given access to all national secrets? Color me shocked.

@Under-the-radar said in #90:
> It's funny because a week or so ago, in another thread, you were the guy saying nuclear weapons are what ensures there is no direct confrontation between major powers.
>
> So what? You were lying then? Or you just learnt the existence of Korea war?
The MAD doctrine wasn't intact then... The USSR had bombs yes - but nuclear war theory was primitive - - why do you think the US & USSR showed restraint then? (the US fired Douglas MacArthur for his plan to nuke China) ... China wasn't nuclear armed then - and the soviets dared not do more than aerial support (which was against the UN resolution) - Korea was the very first test of that, and it passed.

@salmon_rushdie either you believe nuclear weapons prevent direct confrontation between major nuclear powers (what you argued in the other thread), or you believe a direct confrontation between major nuclear powers did happen.

You can't have it both ways.

If it's the first option, implying a direct confrontation between major nuclear powers did NOT happen, then your post #80, and in particular invoking the Vietnam war and the Korea war, is irrelevant.

On the other hand, if it's the second option, then you were lying in the other thread.

Personally, I think saying "nuclear war won't happen ever because it did not happen in a span of 70 years" is delusional. It's like those people who pretend dictatorship always eventually collapse. Mate, take astep back. Democracies have been around for a few centuries. The huge majority of human history is an history of dictatorships.

@ChessMasterGUYS said in #1:
> The presidential election is coming for 2024, who do you support? I support trump (U.S. President)
@leoisnotgood for 2024 everyone. cast your ballots now

@Under-the-radar said in #97:
> @salmon_rushdie either you believe nuclear weapons prevent direct confrontation between major nuclear powers (what you argued in the other thread), or you believe a direct confrontation between major nuclear powers did happen.
>
> You can't have it both ways.
>
> If it's the first option, implying a direct confrontation between major nuclear powers did NOT happen, then your post #80, and in particular invoking the Vietnam war and the Korea war, is irrelevant.
>
> On the other hand, if it's the second option, then you were lying in the other thread.
>
> Personally, I think saying "nuclear war won't happen ever because it did not happen in a span of 70 years" is delusional. It's like those people who pretend dictatorship always eventually collapse. Mate, take astep back. Democracies have been around for a few centuries. The huge majority of human history is an history of dictatorships.

Those were proxy wars so they had 'outs and options' if the US was fighting China or the USSR on their own soil - this would be a completely different discussion. I was purporting that the war was 'hotter then' and no nukes.

There's a fine line, and it hasn't been crossed. It may be some day but not over such small gains. Or in this context. A country like Russia isn't going to risk its entire existence over a clash with Ukraine. But the nuclear bluff holds a lot of weight in scaring people away.