Invasion? What Invasion?

Yet again we are reminded of how much hard-core Libertarians have in common with old-school Communists. Ron Paul’s think tank is striking back at the Students for Liberty founder who broke with the Paulites over Russia. Their reply is hilarious.

They call reports of an “invasion” a conspiracy theory. After all, 93% of the population voted to join Russia. They defend Putin and describe the criticism of the Russian invasion as “neo-con warmongering.” They then proceed through a series of hair-splitting arguments to assert that the Russian troops have done nothing in Ukraine that goes beyond the rights granted in their basing agreements.

When ideology trumps data the consequences are at best absurd, but too often tragic. All the same it’s fun to watch them wrangle. Brings back memories of Trotskyites battling Leninsts over the soul of Communism. And the running dogs of statism look on in laughter.

The full description is over at Slate.

Chris Ladd is a Texan living in the Chicago area. He has been involved in grassroots Republican politics for most of his life. He was a Republican precinct committeeman in suburban Chicago until he resigned from the party and his position after the 2016 Republican Convention. He can be reached at gopliferchicago at gmail dot com.

Posted in Uncategorized
70 comments on “Invasion? What Invasion?
  1. Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

    Since the comments have drifted into oil, gas, and various sources of energy, I’m going to let you smart folks educate me a bit.

    Although I do a fair amount of work in oil and gas, I am very much not an expert on overall supply over the long term around the world.

    I think most folks agree that oil is something of a finite resource. There is a whole lot of it, discovered and undiscovered, but we are using it faster than it is being replaced.

    This is undoubtedly a naive question, but why develop and use the oil and gas resources and reserves in the US now? Why not continue to import other countries’ oil, and then in 300 years when the world is running out, start utilizing (and selling) our own reserves?

    Short term it is more costly, but that would make sense in the long game.

    Is the assumption that ExxonMobil and Shell will develop the next energy source sooner rather than later, so we might as well use what we have because we won’t need it in the future?

    • flypusher says:

      Not my field either, but I will point out that oil has other uses than burning it for energy. It’s just as important as chemical stock.

    • glennkoks says:


      I for one pretty much agree that oil is a finite commodity. However, currently we are at the forefront of a new energy boom that can fuel our economy and to ignore the huge economic gift we have been given would be folly.

      Who knows what will happen with the energy industry in 300 years? Solar, cold fusion, God only knows…

      Right now we pretty much run on fossil fuels. We need to take advantage of our position and capitalize on it right now. I would ride this wave as long as I could and use this boom to help bail our fiscal house out of the mess we find ourselves.

    • CaptSternn says:

      What message? From your link …

      “Mr. Putin’s willingness to negotiate also suggested some confidence that he will be dealing with the West from a position of strength, having annexed Crimea and largely dispersed the remaining Ukrainian military units that had been holed up on bases awaiting instructions from Kiev. The Ukrainian government this week formally ordered a withdrawal of those forces.”

  2. rightonrush says:

    Just my .02 before I head North. Putin isn’t ready for the next wave of terrorism that is sure to start hitting from his Northern Caucasus. Throw the Crimean Tartars into the mix and watch all this blow up in Russia’s face. The bloated P.O.S on the sad looking nag is about to unleash a hit and run force that will bring him to his knees.

  3. Tuttabella says:

    Y’all have a nice weekend. Cap is taking me across state lines again, this time into Oklahoma, for the first time in my life, enough to make John Galt proud.

    Try not to turn this place into the Jerry Springer Show (Lifer! Lifer!) while we’re gone.


    • rightonrush says:

      Be safe and have a great weekend.

    • kabuzz61 says:

      You kids enjoy yourselves. Bring us back a tee shirt.

    • Texan5142 says:

      Have a good weekend you two.

      I have been enjoying the conversation everyone has been having under this topic. Nothing to add, better to be silent and thought a fool that to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.


    • way2gosassy says:

      Have fun Tutt and Happy birthday yet again!

      • rightonrush says:

        That’s right, forgot about her birthday. Hummmmm, old Capt. may pop the question on this trip. Capt and Tutt are almost like having teenagers around again.

  4. bubbabobcat says:

    Off topic (or slightly off topic if speaking more generally) but I though of some of the inhabitants here in reading this quote on an article about the lunacy of Donald Rumsfeld:

    “These 17th century debates remind us that if you have an unshakable belief in something, then no amount of evidence (or lack of evidence) can convince you otherwise. (There are always anti-rationalist objections to everything and anything. It is curious, however, to hear them in the 21st century rather than in the 17th.)”

    • flypusher says:

      “DONALD RUMSFELD: Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones. And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have capabilities that are — what was the word you used, Pam, earlier?”

      Someone needs to give Rummy’s statements THIS treatment:

      • CaptSternn says:

        Governor Dolph Briscoe, Democrat. Great potrayal of the DNC. Good example there, Fly.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Durning was the star of that movie. So light-footed, doing that side step.

      • flypusher says:

        Sternn, if you think that barb was aimed at just one politician, or one party, you miss most of the joke.

  5. rightonrush says:

    Good article regarding the Crimean/Ukraine/Russian/ Europe/USA situation.

    • Crogged says:

      You know, Dan of the Dang Dan Gang has posted some gnarly hyped stuff, but when an article includes this:

      “Whatever tentacles Wall Street may have wrapped around the White House, Capital Hill, and the US judiciary; Big Oil still rules the roost. The Apostles of the Fossil are the oldest and most powerful club in Washington, and “What they say, goes”.

      I check out. After all, “Big Corn” has been around longer than Big Oil and no one complains as if Cargill and whomever else is big in farming are in cahoots all the time? Maybe their are, when their narrow interests coincide.

      In the last few years all the advancements of criminal investigations has pretty much make you someone akin to a Truther with crazy ideas regarding President Kennedy and the assassination.

      There is no ‘big oil’ conspiracy, we invaded Iraq because we were incompetent and that is judgment enough.

      Big Stupid Russia has been in the process of defining what “Russia” is for the last several hundred years and if Crimea is Afghanistan then we can send Gohmert over there this time.

      • DanMan says:

        Don’t know what you got out of it but it was a response to glennkoks comment about Russia hoping to send oil to China. It will be as that article states and at a higher volume than its current highest foreign customer Germany.

        I agree, Russia has and always will act in what it believes is its own best interests. Something happened during the Ragan years that had been pretty well kept in check until some democrats famously pressed the reset button. Having trade agreements is beneficial to Russia and they need Exxon’s expertise and finances as much as Exxon wants the future revenue that the investments would make.

        My hunch is Exxon is going to seriously curtail that work and that won’t bring our prices down any.

    • Crogged says:

      And I didn’t include the Kennedy stuff to imply anything about you ROR, just as a metaphor for believing in conspiracies and what happens. Sometimes I write too fast and hit send too often.

      • rightonrush says:

        No problem here Crogged. I thought it was an interesting article and that was that. Pretty funny that Dan didn’t take the time to read it before he started blithering his normal idiotic drivel.

    • way2gosassy says:

      I am certainly not a Foreign Policy wonk by even the smallest stretch. That said I’m not so sure I agree with all points in the article. I do however believe we have allowed far too many “corporations” to set our policies with regards to oil and related industries in our trade agreements with countries outside the US.

      Just my opinion but I think that we should leave Crimea to the people of Crimea. I think we should continue on the path of developing energy sources other than oil at home. I don’t believe in the isolationism that Ron Paul espouses as two world wars have borne out the truth of safety in numbers.

      If oil companies choose to spend their assets in foreign countries not aligned to our values then they alone should bear what those risks brings them, good or bad.

    • DanMan says:

      hey y’all let me save you some time here, from RoR’s screed

      “As the US continues to abuse its power, these changes become more and more necessary. Foreign governments must form new alliances in order to abandon the present system–the “dollar system”–and establish greater parity between nation-states, the very nation-states that Washington is destroying one-by-one to establish its ghoulish vision of global corporate utopia.”

      The whole thing reads like this. Blogs like Alabama Moon and Testosterone Pit must be real zingers for sourcing.

      As Charles Krauthammer observed over the weekend, Russia took Crimea without so much a sprained ankle occurring and will continue as far into the rest of Ukraine as it wants. If we wanted to topple Russia we’d import liberal democrat policies to them. Its sure taking us down.

      • Crogged says:

        There’s this tiny, little, middle ground, between “It’s Obummer’s fault and we should have listened to Sarah because when will Russia STOP!” and ‘the concept of global domination’ dreamed up by oil companies located in our fair city.

      • Crogged says:

        Last five years of our getting taken down. I know, it’s despite, not because of.

    • way2gosassy says:

      I think opinions are going to be all over the place on this.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Reads like a paranoid anti-U.S. rant. Somebody tell the autor that we aren’t going to war with Russia.

  6. flypusher says:

    Could Crimea be an economic millstone around Putin’s neck?

  7. glennkoks says:

    I don’t necessarily agree with Ron Paul on any “conspiracy” but I can’t see how this justifies much involvement in the Ukraine or makes Mr. Obama look weak. The U.S. has recently approved 7 LNG export facilities and it does not take a genius to figure out just where that gas is going to go.

    Mr. Putin better hope he can ship his gas east to China because after all of his antics Western Europe is going to tell him to “suck an egg” as soon as another source of gas is available. In addition there is billions and billions of dollars in foreign investment in Russian energy that may go by the wayside as well if Europe goes along with tougher sanctions.

    The Russian economy is a one trick pony too heavily dependent on energy. New technologies and the shale boom in the U.S. make his strong handed techniques much softer.

    • DanMan says:

      eh, what’s up Glen? I agree with that take.

      And in the ‘Here’s yer dang bust of Churchill back’ follow-up you see where Obama authorized a fast track for the construction permits for a gas export facility in Oregon? That’ll help those dang Imperialistic Brits won’t it?

      • glennkoks says:


        If Mr. Putin continues to saber rattle expect more “fast tracks” around New Jersey to get gas to Europe quick. It’s really a win/win. We can tell Putin to “get f_____” and it’s great for our economy. Did I mention natural gas is 5x cleaner than coal?

        Seems like there is something for everyone in LNG exporting…

      • DanMan says:

        agree totally glennkoks but will the EPA allow that? doubtful

      • glennkoks says:

        DanMan, I think the EPA’s attitude is inversely correlated with Putin’s.

      • Crogged says:

        Well who wouldn’t want an LNG terminal down the street?

        The EPA isn’t nearly as much a problem as it is getting people to agree to have LNG terminals because “Up yours RUSSIA” Are all their fears grounded? No, but the issue isn’t if there will be an accident but when (including sabotage) and it’s a little too easy to underestimate the real concerns of the people with their skin burned off in the game.

        Why Oregon—Japan.

      • flypusher says:

        “…and it’s a little too easy to underestimate the real concerns of the people with their skin burned off in the game.”

        We can always tell them to suck it up and quit whining. Do it for the USA and capitalism! Do it to say FU to Putin!!

        (For the sarcasm impaired, the level was set to medium high.)

      • CaptSternn says:

        Crogged, what does your link have to do with LNG? You might as well have posted this one …

      • Crogged says:

        Captain, if the Texas City disaster had been an LNG ship the details would have included ship anchors and propellers landing in Tomball.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Crogged, and if it had been molasses we would be reading about the Texas City Molasses Disaster.

      • Crogged says:

        Captain please direct me to an article regarding the explosive or dangerous qualities of molasses, I’m having difficulty finding an expert on this.

      • Crogged says:

        It’s not the most dangerous stuff in the world, but it isn’t the safest either. Concerns aren’t completely unfounded and sometimes are intentionally stirred up by activists with other agendas, which happens with regards to many, many subjects.—.aspx

      • CaptSternn says:

        Crogged, 21 people died, 150 were injured, trains were derailed and buildings wiped off tehir foundations. Sounds like a pretty dangerous substance to me. Gues you can’t be bothered with actually reading links. I mean yours had nothing to do with natural gas at all.

      • Crogged says:

        Captain the issues causing the problem in Boston were more about a poorly constructed tank, not the inherent dangers of hot molasses.

      • objv says:

        DanMan, Thanks for the excellent explanation regarding the Lindbergh comments. I was MIA during the time Lindbergh was discussed and hadn’t read all the comments. As you know, I’ve had quite a problem with the same rascal you are dealing with, so you have my utmost sympathy in that respect.

      • DanMan says:

        bubba is easy to ignore, I was surprised Way2Stupid was such an ally of that poor little idiot. Heck even Homer asked him to tone it down in that thread or one close to it. Poor bubba comments like a bullied child.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Yup Danny Boy it is best to ignore those that call you on your bull-shaite.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Yes Danny and OV, whiners commiserate at will. This is your only outlet that doesn’t charge you $100/hour.

      • CaptSternn says:

        I am curious, Bubba, where is it that you pay $100 oer hour to post comments?

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Do you really take everything literally Cappy?

        Wow. Just wow.

        I’ll just leave it at that.

    • DanMan says:

      glennkoks, the EPA will work at the behest of Obama. Which side is Obama on?

      • glennkoks says:

        DanMan, LNG export is going to happen. We have a good, cheap supply and the Euro’s need it. It just makes good economic sense.

      • glennkoks says:


        There are environmental/safety concerns with just about every source of power. I think safety concerns are real but can be addressed. We have an LNG plant at Freeport converting from importing to exporting gas as well as others around the nation.

      • DanMan says:

        I definitely want it to happen and believe it already should be happening. I just believe Obama intentionally slow walks any ability to develop the infrastructure that would help us and the folks that want to buy it. You said there were seven terminals approved by Obama. Where and when did that occur? I thought the one in Oregon was the initial break through after Cheniere’s terminal in Cameron sometime last year.

        I believe there were 7 applications and some of them were conversions from import terminals to import/export capabilities.

      • glennkoks says:


        Seven have been approved. 6 in the last 10 months. That kind of shoots a hole in the entire Mr. Obama is the oil boogie man thing you hear on FOX. If you look at what the domestic oil industry has done under this admin it’s kind of hard to believe he really he’s much of a boogie man.

      • DanMan says:

        “The Jordan Cove project still needs approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission before construction can begin, and could be several years away from actually shipping any LNG.”

        As I said, I’m all for exporting gas. The article I read before I responded indicated only Houston based Chenier’s Cameron facility had been approved for export until the Oregon Jordan Cove facility. Your trite reference to Fox is weak sauce pal. So we have 6 or 7 new approved permits that have to wait on FERC? m’lay.

  8. CaptSternn says:

    Well finally a new entry. Thanks for that. But you still seem confused over what libertarianism is, what libertarian leaning is, not to mention the actual Libertarian Party and its platform.

    Ron Paul would be and probably is taken seriously by those in the Libertarian Party, but not by libertarian leaning conservatives like those of us in the tea party movement. Devout Libertarians are very much isolationists. They have a lot of good and right ideas, but they go too far and have a lot of wrong views and ideas.

    Many of us libertarian leaning conservatives disagree with their views on foriegn policy, and some disagree with their views on abortion. There are other finer points to be made, but I already provided you with links about libertarian leaning conservatives of the tea party movement from both sides of the aisle.

    Yes, Russia invaded the Crimea peninsula. It wasn’t a violent invasion like the 2003 invasion of Iraq, or the 1990 invasion of Kuwait, and Russia did have an agreement to have military forces in Crimea, but it was still an invasion.

    And I don’t really know of any serious people suggesting we go to war with Russia, not even the former liberals known as Neo-Conservatives. Some want sanctions, like the Obama administration, but not bombs, troops and war. Even here on your blog, seems both sides are just kind of shrugging it off.

    Lifer, it seems that you are getting desperate for things to rail against. Ron Paul? Lindbergh? Appalachian culture extending from the far North into the deep South? Maybe you are tired of discussing serious topics? Maybe just taking a break from serious topics for a while, waiting until election season gets closer? I suppose you do have a few weeks before the Texas GOP primary runoffs. Waiting until the last minute for that, or already know what the results will be so no point in trying to be serious about such things?

    • kabuzz61 says:

      That was my point about caring. Fringe on the right and left.

    • Crogged says:

      Is Rand Paul a ‘fringe’ US Senator?

      • Tuttabella says:

        Never underestimate the power of fringe benefits, no matter how far out, man.

      • CaptSternn says:

        The discussion is about Ron Paul. He is not a senator.

      • objv says:

        Tuttabella, would you and Cap be friends with”fringe” benefits?

      • Tuttabella says:

        Yes, ma’am, I benefit from living on the fringe with my best friend Captain Sternn, and we are committed — although we haven’t yet decided on a facility. 🙂

      • kabuzz61 says:

        There are plenty of good mental institutions around. 😉

      • CaptSternn says:

        Nice, Kabuzz. LOL

      • Tuttabella says:

        Kabuzz, I know there’s a lot of joking here about dementia and such, but God forbid it should actually befall us. I seriously wonder if being online so much is detrimental to our mental health. The repetitive, circular, brooding, and claustrophobic atmosphere here can be rather numbing to the brain.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        You raise a good point Tutt. My wife and I swore of cable news about a year and a half now, because it seemed to be creeping into our lives more and more to a point of not feeling good about ourselves. The same with blogs. I swore off most of the blogs I visit and at times just read and not comment. Blogs are fun and debate is great but when it seems to overtake you, that is not good.

  9. kabuzz61 says:

    And we should care because….?

    • DanMan says:

      Exactly, like Obama said Russia is just a regional power acting out of weakness. Of course the region reaches from Asia to Europe. Doubt Putin wants all those muzzies in Turkey, Azerbijan and Armenia, oh wait, maybe Armenia but surely he wants nothing to do with Mongolia does he? And not Estonia, Belarus and Latvia. Or Lithuania.

      My money is on stepped up development of Kalingrad for now.

  10. DanMan says:

    meh, it’s just flexibity

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 454 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: