Russia-Ukraine

[Chew Toy McCoy]

By the way, I thought (except for his proclivity for hesitating/stuttering), Biden did fine today. Stern but not angry. All business.

I wondered what sanctions the West was still holding in abeyance, and found this:

What other sanctions could Russia face?​

Western nations have threatened Russia with harsh sanctions if it invades Ukraine.​

​

Excluding Russia from Swift​

One measure would be to exclude Russia from the global financial messaging service Swift, which is used by thousands of financial institutions worldwide. ​

This would make it very hard for Russian banks to do business overseas. ​

However, this would have an economic cost for countries like the US and Germany, whose banks have close links with Russia. ​

​

The White House says it is unlikely to be unleashed as an immediate response to an invasion.​

​

Banning Russia from using the US dollar​

The US could ban Russia from financial transactions involving US dollars. Any Western firm that allowed a Russian institution to deal in dollars would face penalties. ​

This could have a huge impact on Russia's economy as most of its oil and gas sales are settled in dollars. It could cripple Russia's foreign trade in other sectors. ​

However, it would mean Russia's oil and gas exports would slump, and that would affect European countries which are dependent on Russian gas.​

​

Block the banks​

The US could blacklist Russian banks, making it almost impossible for it to conduct international transactions.​

Moscow would have to bail out the banks and do what it could to avoid inflation rising and incomes falling. ​

However, this would hurt western investors with money in those banks. ​

Besides, Russia has reserves of over $630bn (£464bn) in its central bank to guard against such economic shocks.​

​

Blocking the export of hi-tech to Russia​

The West could restrict the export of key hi-tech commodities to Russia. ​

The US, for example, could stop companies selling goods such as semiconductor microchips. These are used in everything from cars to smart phones. ​

This would affect not just Russia's defence and aerospace sectors, but whole swathes of its economy.​

However, it could hurt the business of companies which export the technology. ​

​

Energy restrictions​

Russia's economy is hugely dependent on selling gas and oil overseas and Western nations could refuse to buy oil and gas from the big Russian energy giants such as Gazprom or Rosneft. ​

Again, however, this could bring higher gas prices and fuel shortages to Europe. Germany, for example, relies on Russia for one-third of its gas supplies.​

​

​

Limiting Russian access to London's financial institutions ​

Such is the scale of Russian money in banks and property in the UK that the capital has been dubbed "Londongrad". ​

The UK government claims it is tackling this problem with "unexplained wealth orders", which require people to say where their cash has come from. ​

But only a handful of these orders have ever been used.​

​

What are the sanctions on Russia and have they affected its economy?

Over the past two years, Western nations have imposed sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine.

www.bbc.com

There are also other possibilities such as travel bans.

I like how that list all ends with (paraphrased) “However, we can’t upset big business.” The only thing we can guarantee is they’ll jack up gas prices in an already completely manipulated market. The fossil fuel industry just can’t get a break.

Not that it's his fault but the public has already been screaming "When is Biden going to do something about gas prices?!?!" Well, he did something. Raised them. As the perception will go. Good thing the dems have been knocking it out of the park on every other issue. Otherwise they might be in danger of losing power.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

I'm not in the headspace to do a full analysis on this one, but for now I'll just say they really had to dig deep to find an outrage angle on this.

Flashback: Romney calling Russia 'our number one geopolitical foe' prompted media onslaught in 2012

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was roasted in the media in 2012 for saying Russia was the nation's top geopolitical foe.

www.foxnews.com

 

[yaxomoxay]

How in the world could sitting down between two leaders make things worse?

I’ll explain.
One of the most used tactics in diplomacy - and negotiation in general - is to not have the ultimate decision makers sitting at the table until virtually all the decisions are agreed upon. This is why in 99% of the cases it will be a foreign minister (or the SecState) the one that visits his counterpart and then the leader of the other country or entity; often the counterpart will ask for something and the foreign minister will say “I can’t commit to this until I hear from my superior, but let’s have our people work on this”. This attitude is to prevent a) surprises b) unreasonable demands c) misunderstandings, most importantly d) new decisions.

This is why you have meetings at that level over and over, and that’s why it’s so difficult to organize meetings between leaders. This is why you have Casterlagh and Metternich in Vienna and not the respective leaders. This is why you have Kissinger meeting Zhou Enlai before Nixon even stepped on the AF1 to go to China and that’s why Nixon kept distance from Ho Chi Min despite all the diplomatic wheels that were turning behind the scenes. This is also why the US asked for some sort of ground rules before accepting a meeting with Putin.

Bringing Biden - or any other POTUS - at the table when the counterpart has the finger on the trigger between war and peace is very dangerous. It opens the POTUS to all sort of dangers, especially if at the other side of the table you have a smart and cunning individual like Putin. The Russian leader might force Biden into a position in which he (Biden) has to give concessions that sound reasonable, or basically green light the war. Hence, the danger.

So yes, very bad stuff can happen when leaders meet, depending on the circumstances. I think that Biden played this specific issue very well.

Point of note: this also happens when you buy a car from a dealership (the agent will talk to the superior but will not let you do so), or in hostage situations (negotiator will talk but not the decision maker).

 

[Zoidberg]

How in the world could sitting down between two leaders make things worse?

Given all the alternatives screeching from the media like preemptive sanctions (a financial act of war), what possible harm could come from talks? Talks are how conflicts ease, period.

Putting Trump aside (given he belongs in The Hague alongside every modern US president)….

NATO’s expansion, ever marching missile defense systems towards Russia’s borders (hence destroying any security assurances Russia has) is THE driver of the situation we’re in today.

This all stems from the coup of 2014, and it’s MADDENING to see that nobody remembers how that happened. We were caught red handed and yet again the US and it’s vassal states pretend it never happened.

I’m at the point of giving up hope that anyone has the wherewithal to counter 8 years of lies and propaganda. Victoria Nuland is back at it again and even the “liberals” are once again supporting the neoconservative policies that haven’t been altered at all since Bush II.

“Not one inch” my fucking ass.

I'm not sure whether you're serious, or if it's sarcastic. If serious, wow.

 

[NT1440]

I’ll explain.
One of the most used tactics in diplomacy - and negotiation in general - is to not have the ultimate decision makers sitting at the table until virtually all the decisions are agreed upon. This is why in 99% of the cases it will be a foreign minister (or the SecState) the one that visits his counterpart and then the leader of the other country or entity; often the counterpart will ask for something and the foreign minister will say “I can’t commit to this until I hear from my superior, but let’s have our people work on this”. This attitude is to prevent a) surprises b) unreasonable demands c) misunderstandings, most importantly d) new decisions.

This is why you have meetings at that level over and over, and that’s why it’s so difficult to organize meetings between leaders. This is why you have Casterlagh and Metternich in Vienna and not the respective leaders. This is why you have Kissinger meeting Zhou Enlai before Nixon even stepped on the AF1 to go to China and that’s why Nixon kept distance from Ho Chi Min despite all the diplomatic wheels that were turning behind the scenes. This is also why the US asked for some sort of ground rules before accepting a meeting with Putin.

Bringing Biden - or any other POTUS - at the table when the counterpart has the finger on the trigger between war and peace is very dangerous. It opens the POTUS to all sort of dangers, especially if at the other side of the table you have a smart and cunning individual like Putin. The Russian leader might force Biden into a position in which he (Biden) has to give concessions that sound reasonable, or basically green light the war. Hence, the danger.

So yes, very bad stuff can happen when leaders meet, depending on the circumstances. I think that Biden played this specific issue very well.

Point of note: this also happens when you buy a car from a dealership (the agent will talk to the superior but will not let you do so), or in hostage situations (negotiator will talk but not the decision maker).

…Blinken was already planning (now canceled) on meeting with Lavrov. Stating that the heads of state have agreed to a meeting doesn’t prevent the background diplomacy that happens every single day from happening.

We’re both nuclear powers, we’re in constant communication every day even at lower level ranks in the State Department and the military. That’s….the basic functioning of a national state’s literally day to day…

 

[yaxomoxay]

…Blinken was already planning (now canceled) on meeting with Lavrov. Stating that the heads of state have agreed to a meeting doesn’t prevent the background diplomacy that happens every single day from happening.

The Blinken-Lavrov meeting has nothing to do with my original comment and your reply to it. Diplomatic talk (formal, informal, cultural) will not stop.

We’re both nuclear powers, we’re in constant communication every day even at lower level ranks in the State Department and the military. That’s….the basic functioning of a national state’s literally day to day…

Which has very little to do with a meeting between two world leaders. Non-decision makers will work together. Decision-makers will not sit at the table without predetermined decisions, ground rules, and very specific topic boundaries especially in a moment of high tension. Let’s be real for one second please.

 

[NT1440]

I'm not sure whether you're serious, or if it's sarcastic. If serious, wow.

I’m completely serious. I’ve been watching this space since 2012 or so when I started paying attention to the (then current) Obama administration’s actual policy moves instead of their language.

Robert Perry was cutting through the propaganda at the time. For those who don’t know this is the man that broke the Iran Contra story when the media at the time was openly calling it a conspiracy theory. I’ll take the word of a proven pest-to-power journalist over the narratives our corporate consent-manufacturers “news” outlets.

ROBERT PARRY: Who's Telling the 'Big Lie' on Ukraine?

The U.S. group think still driving the Ukraine crisis began at least eight years ago, as detailed in this article by Robert Parry on Sept. 2, 2014. Exclusive: Official Washington draws the Ukraine crisis in black-and-white colors with Putin the bad guy and the U.S.-backed leaders in Kiev the good

consortiumnews.com

Honestly though, 2014 was recent history, there’s no reason people can’t remember Victoria “regime change” Nuland getting caught red handed carrying on the neocon agenda (her husband is one of the Kagan’s, who are behind the agenda put forth in response to 9/11).

 

[Deleted member 215]

I'm not sure whether you're serious, or if it's sarcastic. If serious, wow.

I love it. He's like the only actual leftist here and it's interesting to hear that perspective. Not saying I agree with it (or even know enough about this subject to say whether I agree with it), but I appreciate hearing it. If you have a counter-argument, by all means.

 

[Zoidberg]

I love it. He's like the only actual leftist here and it's interesting to hear that perspective. Not saying I agree with it (or even know enough about this subject to say whether I agree with it), but I appreciate hearing it. If you have a counter-argument, by all means.

Define "leftist". Because I have trouble matching the traditional "leftist" values with someone who sides with strongmen and sees Western democracies (flawed as they are) as the aggressor in this situation.

Let me guess, their line of argument is "CIA is bad", "Tuskegee experiment", and "Russia saved the world from the Nazis in WW2".

The kind of black and white thinking that readily jumps from "US imperialism is bad" to "... therefore anyone and anything that goes against the US must be good", but they see nothing wrong in elected officials wearing $500000 watches.

 

[NT1440]

Define "leftist". Because I have trouble matching the traditional "leftist" values with someone who sides with strongmen and see Western democracies (flawed as they are) the aggressor in this situation.

Good lord. I’m “siding” with someone for pointing out that the entire core of the issue today is based on lies of the recent past?

Apparently I sided with Hussein. Apparently Ghaddafi too. Assad as well.

Either get an actual argument or don’t discuss it at all. Pinning me as a Putin supporter? Come on. It’s been over half a century since the McCarthy era.

I’m against capitalism and imperialism. I’ve got lots of other opinions too, but I believe that makes me a “leftist” by most definitions that haven’t been diluted by todays modern era (democrats by definition cannot be leftists as they explicitly support the capitalist structure).

You can disagree with my stance, but I’m at least providing something to this discussion (I even brought links!). Do you have anything to say to my actual posts or were you here for drive by insults?

I see you edited it to include more assumptions. FYI a $500K is an abomination. No one person should have wealth enough to even consider purchasing one.

 

[lizkat]

... Which has very little to do with a meeting between two world leaders. Non-decision makers will work together. Decision-makers will not sit at the table without predetermined decisions, ground rules, and very specific topic boundaries especially in a moment of high tension. Let’s be real for one second please.

Yes. Putin's already working off a well honed script that he's had in the works for a very long time. At a table with that guy right now, Biden would be stuck trying to ad lib on behalf of "western interests" including the whole unwieldy combo of Ukraine, the EU and NATO, officials in which entities do not all see eye to eye on best way forward vis a vis what Putin's been doing, So that shouldn't happen and is indeed dangerous.

Other diplomats, even other western heads of state are more free to continue discussing options and alternatives to outright war between Ukraine proper and Russia, which conflict cannot not end well for anyone, not to say that Putin seizing eastern Ukraine is acceptable either.

I won't gainsay some of what @NT1440 is saying about assorted events of 2014, but none of that justifies the script that Putin's trying to run here. He's literally trying to roll back the dissolution of the USSR and is starting with the most vulnerable near neighbors, Belarus and Ukraine.

Ironic that Belarus was an early declarer of independence as the Soviet Union collapsed. Regardless of its problems since then with autocracy and corruption, its citizens have always been wary of Russia's attempts to co-opt its sovereignty through local federations and treaties. But now their country has essentially been occupied by Russia, with Putin's Russian "peacekeepers" parked at the border with Ukraine. All without a shot being fired at a Belarus citizen by a Russian soldier.

 

[SuperMatt]

Good lord. I’m “siding” with someone for pointing out that the entire core of the issue today is based on lies of the recent past?

Apparently I sided with Hussein. Apparently Ghaddafi too. Assad as well.

Either get an actual argument or don’t discuss it at all. Pinning me as a Putin supporter? Come on. It’s been over half a century since the McCarthy era.

I’m against capitalism and imperialism. I’ve got lots of other opinions too, but I believe that makes me a “leftist” by most definitions that haven’t been diluted by todays modern era (democrats by definition cannot be leftists as they explicitly support the capitalist structure).

You can disagree with my stance, but I’m at least providing something to this discussion (I even brought links!). Do you have anything to say to my actual posts or were you here for drive by insults?

I see you edited it to include more assumptions. FYI a $500K is an abomination. No one person should have wealth enough to even consider purchasing one.

I found the article you posted interesting. However, 8 years after the author’s statement about Russia not invading… Russians actually ARE massing tanks and artillery and preparing for invasion.

In addition, the west didn’t actually do much after all when it came to Ukraine in 2014, despite the author’s worries that they would.

As for imperialism, I feel like Putin’s plan is to return to the days of the Soviet Empire. He has stated publicly that he found the demise of the USSR to be one of the greatest tragedies in history. (or was it THE greatest tragedy?)

I don’t think anybody from the west is asking to go to war over this.

Finally, I am not familiar with the “neocon agenda” - can you tell me what you mean by that?

 

[Zoidberg]

Good lord. I’m “siding” with someone for pointing out that the entire core of the issue today is based on lies of the recent past?

Apparently I sided with Hussein. Apparently Ghaddafi too. Assad as well.

Either get an actual argument or don’t discuss it at all. Pinning me as a Putin supporter? Come on. It’s been over half a century since the McCarthy era.

I’m against capitalism and imperialism. I’ve got lots of other opinions too, but I believe that makes me a “leftist” by most definitions that haven’t been diluted by todays modern era (democrats by definition cannot be leftists as they explicitly support the capitalist structure).

You can disagree with my stance, but I’m at least providing something to this discussion (I even brought links!). Do you have anything to say to my actual posts or were you here for drive by insults?

I haven't insulted anyone. I'm just looking at the plain facts, and I am of the opinion that once in a while, in every thought process, it's good to stop and do a sanity check. Such sanity checks could for instance be asking yourself "what are the chances of a strongman who has been in power for 20+ years and has squashed all its opposition and free press is actually doing the right thing?".

I was against my country invading Iraq in 2003 under false pretences, just like I am against Russia invading Ukraine under false pretences.
You call the 2014 events "a coup". Why? I'll assume you're lucky to have always lived in a country where your vote is counted and you don't realise that not everyone has the privilege of having fair elections. Sometimes the whole system is rigged and there's no other way to improve things.

As for your links, the one you linked to, honestly is utter hogwash, denying Ukrainians the very right to decide for themselves as if they were children who don't know any better. Admission to NATO is not forced, each and everyone of its members CHOSE to be in it. Have you stopped to consider why so many former soviet vassal states were so eager to join?

There's little doubt in my mind that when someone puts their political ideology –in your case, anti-imperialism, although I suspect is plain old contrarianism– ahead of basic human rights, you're in the wrong.

 

[Zoidberg]

I found the article you posted interesting. However, 8 years after the author’s statement about Russia not invading… Russians actually ARE massing tanks and artillery and preparing for invasion.

In addition, the west didn’t actually do much after all when it came to Ukraine in 2014, despite the author’s worries that they would.

As for imperialism, I feel like Putin’s plan is to return to the days of the Soviet Empire. He has stated publicly that he found the demise of the USSR to be one of the greatest tragedies in history. (or was it THE greatest tragedy?)

I don’t think anybody from the west is asking to go to war over this.

Finally, I am not familiar with the “neocon agenda” - can you tell me what you mean by that?

There's always a myriad of blogs like that, It's basically like Infowars in terms of integrity, just for a different public. They claim to have been founded as left-wing think tanks, but keep reading and clicking through that rabbit hole and oddly enough you invariably end up reading about how the US imperialism is bad, the EU is bad, and Russia is the victim. A good example of that is Reseau Voltaire.

It's basically agitprop.

 

[NT1440]

I found the article you posted interesting. However, 8 years later, Russians actually ARE massing tanks and artillery and preparing for invasion.

In addition, the west didn’t actually do much after all when it came to Ukraine in 2014, despite the author’s worries that they would.

As for imperialism, I feel like Putin’s plan is to return to the days of the Soviet Empire. He has stated publicly that he found the demise of the USSR to be one of the greatest tragedies in history. (or was it THE greatest tragedy?)

I don’t think anybody from the west is asking to go to war over this.

Finally, I am not familiar with the “neocon agenda” - can you tell me what you mean by that?

The civil war which has killed thousands is a direct result of 2014. The American people by and large have no idea that Ukraine has been bombing it’s own people since they voted to leave Ukraine (I don’t know if Ukraine’s government structure actually allows for it, but they did vote that was in the Russian speaking territories we’re talking about today).

I can’t fathom where people get this idea of the return of the USSR. Russia simply doesn’t have that capacity, never will. I get it’s a good cartoon plot, but the material conditions of reality means it’s simply not possible. Putin isn’t a cartoon villain (though there are plenty who earnestly believe he is, but you can usually weed them out because they also believe he’s somehow the worlds richest man too…secretly). He’s just as evil as every head of state of every other country.

Rumsfeld, Cheney, the Kagans, Wolfowitz, etc. The network of think tanks that drafted what would become America’s foreign policy of aggression after 9/11 has come to be, and nothing has changed other than tactics regardless of what administration has come since. PNAC laid it out explicitly, and all their offshoots since needing to rebrand are still firmly seated in public and private power. I paid attention to the ghouls after they departed the Bush White House, they’re all still very much shaping elite perception of how to manage the Empire. Do a search for “total spectrum dominance” to get a basic understanding of the capabilities America has been yearning for.

 

[Zoidberg]

He’s just as evil as every head of state of every other country.

Tell me you've had a cushy life and have never known oppression, without telling me you've had a cushy life and never known oppression.

 

[NT1440]

I haven't insulted anyone. I'm just looking at the plain facts, and I am of the opinion that once in a while, in every thought process, it's good to stop and do a sanity check. Such sanity checks could for instance be asking yourself "what are the chances of a strongman who has been in power for 20+ years and has squashed all its opposition and free press is actually doing the right thing?".

I was against my country invading Iraq in 2003 under false pretences, just like I am against Russia invading Ukraine under false pretences.
You call the 2014 events "a coup". Why? I'll assume you're lucky to have always lived in a country where your vote is counted and you don't realise that not everyone has the privilege of having fair elections. Sometimes the whole system is rigged and there's no other way to improve things.

As for your links, the one you linked to, honestly is utter hogwash, denying Ukrainians the very right to decide for themselves as if they were children who don't know any better. Admission to NATO is not forced, each and everyone of its members CHOSE to be in it. Have you stopped to consider why so many former soviet vassal states were so eager to join?

There's little doubt in my mind that when someone puts their political ideology –in your case, anti-imperialism, although I suspect is plain old contrarianism– ahead of basic human rights, you're in the wrong.

I live in America. My vote has never counted.

Basic human rights? We’re actively starving 20 million people in Afghanistan. We could turn off the bloodshed tomorrow in Yemen if we cut off intelligence and refueling support for the Saudis. Puerto Rico is still explicitly treated as a colony as we impose privatization of the electric grid which we STILL haven’t fixed. 2000+ cities and towns have higher lead levels than Flint did when it was all over the news. There are more empty homes in the country than homeless people. The US is the only non-signatory of the declaration of children’s rights. We assassinated Haiti’s president recently. This country lets tens of thousands of people die every year by being the ONLY industrialized nation on the planet that doesn’t have any form of universal healthcare at the behest of capital interests.

I don’t want to hear a damn thing about not believing in Human Rights, in my eyes my country is THE biggest abuser of human rights on the planet given the power we wield.

I’m not contrarian, I have very specific views and reasons for them.

Can we get to an actual discussion or are my interactions with you here simply going to be…this?

 

[NT1440]

There's always a myriad of blogs like that, It's basically like Infowars in terms of integrity, just for a different public. They claim to have been founded as left-wing think tanks, but keep reading and clicking through that rabbit hole and oddly enough you invariably end up reading about how the US imperialism is bad, the EU is bad, and Russia is the victim. A good example of that is Reseau Voltaire.

It's basically agitprop.

…ConsortiumNews is the longest running independent online news source in the country. Robert Perry made a career of exposing the lies of the powerful (Iran Contra) and he didn’t back down until the day he died. Chris Hedges, John Pilger, John Karaoku, etc. sit on the board of directors. The site has won numerous investigative awards. The site has a 20+ year track record and has always spoken truth to power regardless of which “team” has been in the White House.

I’m done with you. I’m some random guy on the internet who’s speaking my opinion. It’s not worth my mental health to get worked up over this, I just wish this was an actual conversation instead of assumptions on where I’m coming from. Contrarian isn’t it, I have principles that I hold firm, that’s it.

 

[SuperMatt]

The civil war which has killed thousands is a direct result of 2014. The American people by and large have no idea that Ukraine has been bombing it’s own people since they voted to leave Ukraine (I don’t know if Ukraine’s government structure actually allows for it, but they did vote that was in the Russian speaking territories we’re talking about today).

I can’t fathom where people get this idea of the return of the USSR. Russia simply doesn’t have that capacity, never will. I get it’s a good cartoon plot, but the material conditions of reality means it’s simply not possible. Putin isn’t a cartoon villain (though there are plenty who earnestly believe he is, but you can usually weed them out because they also believe he’s somehow the worlds richest man too…secretly). He’s just as evil as every head of state of every other country.

Rumsfeld, Cheney, the Kagans, Wolfowitz, etc. The network of think tanks that drafted what would become America’s foreign policy of aggression after 9/11 has come to be, and nothing has changed other than tactics regardless of what administration has come since. PNAC laid it out explicitly, and all their offshoots since needing to rebrand are still firmly seated in public and private power. I paid attention to the ghouls after they departed the Bush White House, they’re all still very much shaping elite perception of how to manage the Empire. Do a search for “total spectrum dominance” to get a basic understanding of the capabilities America has been yearning for.

Where do “people” get the idea of the return of the USSR? I’d say straight from the horse’s mouth:

“First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” Putin said. “As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory.

I also don’t believe the idea that all world leaders are ”just as evil” as each other. That makes no sense; they are all different.

As for Rumsfeld and Cheney, they were horrible. I don’t believe they are still pulling the strings though (especially Rumsfeld)…

 

[Zoidberg]

I live in America. My vote has never counted.

Basic human rights? We’re actively starving 20 million people in Afghanistan. We could turn off the bloodshed tomorrow in Yemen if we cut off intelligence and refueling support for the Saudis. Puerto Rico is still explicitly treated as a colony as we impose privatization of the electric grid which we STILL haven’t fixed. 2000+ cities and towns have higher lead levels than Flint did when it was all over the news. There are more empty homes in the country than homeless people. The US is the only non-signatory of the declaration of children’s rights. We assassinated Haiti’s president recently. This country lets tens of thousands of people die every year by being the ONLY industrialized nation on the planet that doesn’t have any form of universal healthcare at the behest of capital interests.

I want want to hear a damn thing about not believing in Human Rights, in my eyes my country is THE biggest abuser of human rights on the planet given the power we wield.

I’m not contrarian, I have very specific views and reasons for them.

Can we get to an actual discussion or are my interactions with you here simply going to be…this?

Yeah, sure. I just expect a modicum of good faith, but apparently you genuinely believe in your conspiracy theories, so I guess that counts as good faith?

If I may, it would do you some good to travel for a bit and see how bad things are for people who really have it bad. It made me put things in context and taught me to appreciate how fucking lucky I am, and you seriously need some of that.