Steve Roundy drops off a weapon to Salt Lake City Police officers during a buyback for those who wanted to take their firearms out of circulation Saturday, June 11, 2022, in Salt Lake City. The gun-buyback event at the Salt Lake City Police Department is an effort to get guns off the streets following a series of mass shootings across the U.S. in recent weeks. Individuals were able to exchange their firearms for gift cards. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)
Previous Post
Next Post

On a long enough timeline, gun registration always leads to gun confiscation.  And once again, we see that playing out in Estonia, a small first-world country that shares a border with Russia.  Given what’s happening in nearby Ukraine to the south, the Estonian government announced that all Russians and Belorusians (those from Belarus) living within Estonia must surrender their guns in the coming days.

If it makes you feel better, think of it as a mandatory version of the “buybacks” commonly held here in America.  Only they know what guns you’re to bring, because you were forced to register them.

And if you don’t bring them all?

If the disfavored ethnic or nationality groups fail to “voluntarily” give them up, then Estonia’s government will forcibly remove them.  All told, thanks to the official government gun registry, “only” 629 registered of these foreign gun owners will be forced to surrender their firearms.

For some reason the Estonian government feels that 629 registered gun owners poses a “security threat” to their government.  Maybe the government there is sort of like the Biden administration that thinks a few hundred unarmed protesters on January 6th was a violent insurrection.

ZeroHedge has the story:

Russian nationals living in Estonia will have their firearms forcibly confiscated by the police if they refuse to hand them over voluntarily under a new law.

The gun confiscation measure will also apply to Belarusians living in the eastern European country.

The government has finalized the details of the bill and it will be put before the legislature, after which it is expected to be voted into law.

Asked if she expected gun owners to comply, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas said it was “difficult for her to judge.”

“In any case, we will send this draft law to the Riigikogu during the current government’s term. This has already been agreed upon, and a deadline has been set. We will definitely give time for people to voluntarily hand over their weapons, and after this deadline expires it will be the police’s turn,” she added.

Kallas asserted that due to the “current circumstances,” Russians and Belarussians “with weapons in their hands are a threat to the security of Estonia.”

Between ghost guns and 3-D printed guns, along with who knows how many tens of thousands of unregistered guns no doubt floating around her nation, someone should tell Prime Minister Kaja Kallas that she can’t stop the signal.


Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I would be interested to know what type of firearms are owned by those folks forced to surrender them in Estonia.

    • If it fires a projectile, the government will want to confiscate it.

      I really hope the heavy-hitters in gun rights (GOA, FPC, and others) are spending some quality time together formulating ways to destroy firearm registration laws.

      I don’t see it being practical to eliminate serial numbers on new guns, as it would make it next to impossible for a gun owner to recover a gun stolen from them. Also, controls are needed in manufacturing and distributing guns. What happens after the end user takes possession is another issue…

    • Mostly Hunting Rifles I believe but given the region I would not be surprised if there were quite a few semi-autos as well- any way I’d go for the skilled hunter rather than the yob with the AK as the greaterb threat by a county mile. Given the circumstance what would you do with thousands of Russians and Belarus’es crossing the border every day and with the BALTIC STATES very much on PUTIN’S EXPANSION map.?
      You notice the law mentions RUSSIANS and BELARUSSIANs but whether that applies to citizens I can’t say . When ESTONIA [ and the other BALTIC STATES] joined the EU one of the condition was that properly registered Russian who did not want to go to Russia had tro be give citizenship

    • sounds like a symbolic act directed at a specific minority that poses no discernible threat….

  2. UTTER IDIOCY. Given the fact that Estonia borders Russia, a gun confiscation program, surely concocted by The State Department, is absurd. It wouldn’t take much for the Russians to re-supply their allies or intervene militarily in the area. If the Estonians start to forcibly remove these firearms with loss of life to the ethnic Russians, then another Ukraine situation could arise. Real diplomacy and peace negotiations need to be at the forefront of any state sponsored actions now, before escalation occurs.

  3. Estonia is called, “Finland’s Mexico” as a lot of low cost labor is available to Western European countries. Concealed carry is a thing in Estonia as well, as it’s not permitted in a lot of European countries.

    The non-citizen Russians and Belorusians have only the rights the Estonians allow them and they aren’t even entitled to live in the country and can be booted out. Since they are not kicking them out, I view this action as a politician trying to show how tough they are to their voters, as we know it will have zero effect on crime or terrorism.

    The only crime related results may be more violence against Russians or Beloruians living in Estonia. which could be ironic, as these residents likely are not supporters of Putin’s policies, which is why they left their countries in the first place.

    • uote———-as these residents likely are not supporters of Putin’s policies, which is why they left their countries in the first place.——-quote

      Only partially true. Stalin launched a massive campaign to repopulate the conquered East European territories with Russian immigrants and when Stalin was in power they received privilege’s Estonians did not. And Russians coming to Estonia knew damn well during the Stalin years they were in no way escaping his ever watchful eye.

    • of course,..if you’re white everything is your fault…they want to do more than take away your guns…how about your children?

  4. Pretty dumb idea, not just because of the obvious, but they’re alienating people who would likely be on their side in a war. Russians in Estonia are there for a reason and probably aren’t hardened Russian patriots. They are likely just as fearful as a Russian invasion as any Estonian because they’d probably be branded as traitors to the motherland. Historically, Russians have been able to be recruited by opposing forces due to the totalitarian regimes that have ruled Russia being hated just as much and often more then the country they are at war with.

  5. I have got to stop reading these gun-control stories. They always trigger me into buying more guns and ammo. It’s like a Pavlovian response. Makes reading TTAG an expensive habit.

  6. But, but, but, they are Ruskins with gunms.
    Ruskins are bad.
    The world hates the Ruskins,
    Damned communist.
    Well they used to be communist, now the only communistic country that’s a major power is China, but they are not “damned communist ” they are the good communist, that’s why America, a nation based on freedom, buys everything from the “good communist” instead of those bad used to be communist.
    I think theBiden should put more sanctions on Ruskia, America hasn’t suffered enough. 8% of ruskin imported petroleum and our gas goes from $2.27 a gallon to $8. Thank goodness theBiden somehow got the price of gas to drop four dollars.
    Don’t know how he did that? But by golly we all should vote for him again, and the shelves aren’t bare anymore. I suppose peanut butter being $12 a pound might have something to do with a shelf full of peanut butter but I’m no economist so I really wouldn’t know.
    Let’s Go Brandon

    • The only thing communist in China is the title. Communism died because it couldn’t make a profit. China is a weird mix of Fascism and capitalism. Heavy on the Fascism.

      • “Communism died because it couldn’t make a profit.”

        The fiscal side was changed, but nothing on the fascist side was changed…

      • Oh No. More despair for America.
        We’re fcked.
        The Chinese will make better capitalist then they did communist.
        Well we can keep our fingers crossed and hope they can persuade the White House that they can sale Norinco products again in the U.S.A.
        At least he Chinese don’t seem as worried about we the peoples Constitutional Rights quite as negatively as Our government does.
        As fast as world economics are changing I see 4 more years of President Joseph Robinett Biden as a necessity .

        • Everybody makes a better capitalist than they due a communist. Communism is just a pipe dream. It ignores reality and human nature. So does social-lism.

    • the dems have a tendency to act on impulse…with little consideration of the consequences…

  7. Trying to equate the problems of gun control in Estonia to that of the U.S. only often shows American ignorance of another culture and their historical and endless ethnic wars and genocide.

    Estonia does not need registration to confiscate firearms as those who have them that no longer should have them know that to keep them they run an extreme risk of being caught with them. The last thing Russians who are living in Estonia want is to be deported back to Russia because they hoarded arms and are now perceived by the Estonian government to be a threat to the country.

    Boch gloating over only 600 some arms at the present being turned in is to ignore European history, of which he is obviously sadly deficient in, as the rest of the arms will be turned in for a variety of reasons and I am not speaking of forced house to house searches either, assuming Putin does not give orders for violence and terrorism.

    Estonia fears that a minority of Russians living there or Putin Operatives embedded there might deliberately cause a terrorist innocent to give Putin the excuse to invade and Putin has already stated he intends to do exactly that. This time in history the Europeans are taking seriously the rantings of a mad dog dictator as compared when they looked the other way when Hitler made his deraigned intentions public.

    It is to the Estonians humanitarianism that they did not kick out all of the Russians after they achieved independence and of course to be fair the other reason they did not was that at the time they were not sure the U.S. would condone or protect them from re-invasion by Russia if they had done so. Now things have changed with Putin’s rantings and they are starting to push back. Russians turning in arms that are living in Estonia is the least of their worries if they want to stay there.

    Americans have no idea of the racisms and genocides that have plagued Europe down through the centuries. If you have actually been there or will go there you can easily see the tensions between the various ethnic groups. I saw it easily when I was there between Hungarians and Romanians. Frankly even though I saw no violence the intent of violence between the groups was shocking. If both groups had said nothing most Americans could not have distinguished who was who. The question most Americans ask when they discover this is “How can white people who many times all are indistinguishable between the two groups all want to kill each other”?

    Russians in Estonia are keeping a low profile and they know a few small arms will not protect them from the Estonian government or from a genocide if Estonian civilians chose to do that even without governmental approval. During the Warsaw Ghetto uprising the heavily armed Germany Army wiped out the Jews in 45 days. It was amazing they lasted that long.

    • That was a pretty good read but it just wouldn’t be right if someone didn’t bash it.
      Germany Army. ? Did you mean German Army, and then if you did shouldn’t you say Nazi Army instead?

      • It would have been a better read if he knew what he was talking about. putin, just like hitler has gotten away with a lot of shit. Donbass, crimea, chechnya to name a few. And had he steam rolled Ukraine as he thought he would there would have been a lot of angry words but little else.

        dacian has never been to europe. It shows every time he comments about it.

    • The Russian operatives in Europe have access to full auto weapons and explosives..

      And Russian operatives wouldn’t register their weapons with the respective Govt’s!!!!

      They don’t need civilian arms!!!

      Shows clearly you have no idea how the spy world operates!!!

    • a lot of Europeans…particularly in the east….seem to live in a time warp when it comes to grudges…





    • Jebuz, this retard again…

      Lemme spell this out idiot. All enemies sir, foreign and domestic. The part of your Oath of Service that you conveniently dishonor. That includes anyone who would infringe on the 2a or any other part of the BoR.

      Just. Like. You. Moron.

    • The Oath for you:

      The Oath of Enlistment (for enlisted):

      “I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

      The Oath of Office (for officers):
      “I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the _____ (Military Branch) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”

      • A word from a Founding Father also applies.

        “A true patriot will defend his country from its government.”

        – Thomas Jefferson

        And don’t quote Oscar Wilde back at me. :p

    • NTexas is a fed or a troll. Nobody is really as stupid as he tries to appear to be. He’s writing in the manner that he think us dumb yokel gun nuts do. Nobody that was really this stupid would be able even feed themselves, let alone find their way onto the internet. TTAG has some of the weirdest trolls in the internet.
      Also, Dacian is a known pędophile that has never so much as held a firearm.

  9. All the former Warsaw Pact nations are authoritarian at heart. They may temporarily be allied with the US, but they are not “friends”. They are not little Americans inside, eager to break free from their bonds, and become Jeffersonian democrats.

    Not arguing against alliances, but understand who you get in bed with.

    • If people are serious about avoiding war? Then you are going to have to make some kind of peaceful alliance, with countries with less freedom than ours. This is something that the “pacifist anti-war crowd” never understands.

      Mexico is our “friend”, Russia in 1942 was our “friend”.

      • “Russia in 1942 was our “friend”.”

        Not advertising to know what Stalin’s game was, but he never really needed the western allies to open a “second front” to take pressure off Russia. Once the Germans diverted from taking Moscow, the war was “won” for the Soviets. Indeed, with invasions of Italy, and France, the Germans did not strip their Eastern Front in order to fend off invasions in the west.

        The Wehrmacht was configured only for strike and conquer. The German army was not designed, nor configured, for long-term, continuous warfare across vast expanses of territory. Stalin knew this. He knew that Germany did not have the ability to actually conquer Russia, much less other nations of the Soviet Union.

        The western allies should have told Stalin to “sit on it”. The western alliance nations should have stated the alliance was all about western Europe, and Stalin had his own alliance of nations to deal with the Germans.

        • to Sam

          quote———–Stalin knew this. He knew that Germany did not have the ability to actually conquer Russia, much less other nations of the Soviet Union.———-quote

          This is 100% wrong. In the early days of the war with victory after victory going to the Germans and the Germans taking tens of thousands of prisoners Stalin held a high level security meeting with most of the top Military Men. It was seriously discussed that perhaps conceding to defeat if Germany would allow Stalin to keep what he still had. It actually came down to the wire as to what they should do but they at the end of the meeting they decided they would go on fighting a while longer before calling a truce with Hitler. The rest as they say is history.

        • to Sam I Am
          “Once the Germans diverted from taking Moscow, the war was “won” for the Soviets.”

          I totally agree with you. When Hitler foolishly ordered troops to turn away from Moscow and go south to the oil fields, that was pretty much the end for Germany. A centralized authoritarian government would have completely collapsed. Had Moscow been taken by the German army.

          But if the Battle of Britain had been lost, and England made peace with Germany. The United States would never have entered the war against Germany. America would not have had the English Islands in order to Stage an invasion into Europe. And Hitler would have been able to continue his war in the east as long as he wanted to.
          And those Murmansk bound convoys like PQ-17, that was nearly destroyed by the German air force. Those supply convoys would never have happened.

    • I think there’s an extremely good argument against overly complicated alliances with too many parties and competing interests.

      Case in point: World War I.

      Do alliances in Eastern Europe fit this particular bill? Probably, since such alliances serve to purpose other than to provoke Moscow and provide no real benefit to us.

      Such a strategy seems, to me at least, to be stuck somewhere in the 1980’s (probably because it literally is due to who’s in charge of things). After the fall of the USSR we could have had a reasonably friendly relationship, at least businesslike, with Moscow. Even Putin wanted this and it seemed nearly inevitable until Bush took offense to Putin’s stance on Iraq.

      But Neocons couldn’t let the Cold War go.

      • I think there’s an extremely good argument against overly complicated alliances with too many parties and competing interests.
        Case in point: World War I. !”

        Which also started in East Europe.

        I understand so many small countries being part of NATO. so as to get protection from Russia, but what do those small countries bring to the alliance, to make it stronger?

        • That’s my point.

          To *us* those small countries represent basically nothing but cost and tail-risk. They’re the ones supposedly getting a good deal. But are they really? Probably not because IRL we’re unlikely to “put it all on the line” a country like Poland, nevermind a place like Lithuania. Ask the Ukes how being our “friend” is working out.

          Can these small countries offer us things? Sure, Moldova sent us some very, very, very good anti-IED teams to help in Iraq but it was a total of <50 guys and a dozen dogs. Why? They wanted to be in our good graces. And there's nothing wrong with that nor our voiced support for their territorial integrity. Nor is there an issue with us openly supporting the OSCE 5+2 attempts to address Transnistria.

          But would it be worth it, to us, to form an alliance with them?

          In a utilitarian sense, no. We could just pay them for IED the expertise and then duplicate it, as von Clausewitz suggested.

          And that doesn't mean that we don't necessarily stick up for them in some cases. But it does mean that we're not committed to a large war over the goings-on in a small country which really is of no strategic advantage to the US or the West generally.

          This is a larger scale issue of going to a bar with a bunch of people. The more people there are the more chance there is that one or more of them creates friction with someone you don’t know and didn’t even interact with. And… countries don’t do bar fights. Historically speaking, the geopolitical version of smashing someone with a barstool involves tank columns and artillery.

        • “Ask the Ukes how being our “friend” is working out.”

          So far, not bad. The arms that NATO are providing are denying the Russians of the battlefield initiative. Russia is on their heels, and that’s dangerous, since it greatly increases the chances of Putin using a tactical nuke if he thinks he’s losing.

          Are Putin’s commanders telling him the real story of how badly his army is performing? How his ‘surge’ of new recruits are being dropped off on rural roads with nothing more than a rifle and no support gear?

          Where will he detonate that nuke in Ukraine, that won’t end up working against him?

        • So far, not bad.

          If being a pawn of larger countries and getting half your country blown to shit is “not bad”, I don’t want to know what “bad” is.

          The truth is that the Ukes are nearly certain to lose this war because they’re going to lose EU support for it as the EU dissolves into a bankrupt anarchy.

          The same is probably true of US support as this country’s currency slips beneath the waves.

      • to strych9

        I have come to believe that everyone. Libertarians the Liberals the Left, and the conservatives. They all want to save the world. To save these Outsiders from themselves. They want to bring their values, whatever they are. To the rest of the world. The Libertarians were supporting a boycott against the Philippine government. Because of the drug war there. So even the Libertarians will find something when supporting a boycott against another country. And they are not happy with the Russians. Who passed some kind of anti-h0msexu@l law.

        So the Three L’s can complain all they want about the conservatives. When it comes to meddling in other countries. But the Three L’s will certainly find things they dislike about other societies. And they will try and use US Government Force, in order to force a change in a foreign Society.

        • OK.

          None of that changes the fact that Neocons* blow up children for money the same way that Neolibs do.

          *Note the chasm of difference between Conservatives and Neocons.

      • Roosevelt knew that keeping russia and china in the war was vital to our interests as they tied-up vast amounts of enemy troops…so keeping those supply lines open was mandatory regardless of the cost…..

      • Putin had an image of being a smart guy…but he really screwed the pooch this time…now he’s trying to settle for plan B…a link between Crimea and the donbass…but even that may not be attainable…can this guy tolerate losing?….and does that sound familiar?….

      • true..after the collapse of the Soviet Union we seemed to be more interested in sticking our thumb in their eye and disrespecting the russians…then Putin showed up and promised “to make russia great again”…..

  10. After the election of Obama, Putin was marketed to U.S. conservatives as a Pro Family Christian Conservative. This Active Measures campaign by the Russians to deceive Americans has been somewhat successful and resulted in U.S. conservatives expressing sympathy and support for Putin and Russia. However, if you look at Putins and Russians friends – Communist China, North Korea, and Iran – Brutal totalitarian regimes wit the worst records for persecuting Christians; then you realize Putin and Russia are neither conservative or Christian, and are NOT the friends or allies of U.S. conservatives. The sooner U.S. conservatives realize this and reject Putin and Russia, and start seeing them as the enemy, the better off they will be.
    It’s clear that the U.S. left has historically had the support of foreign communists, and the Trump Russia hoax was to conceal the lefts cooperation with Russia, Putin, and the communists; AND the Active Measures to build support for Putin by the U.S. conservatives was designed by the U.S. communists, and the Russians to create an environment where the U.S. right could be targeted as terrorists that support Russian when a war finally broke out so their arms could be confiscated and U.S. communists could finally solidify one party communist rule of the United States.
    The solution to this is to:
    1. Have loyalty ONLY to God, and the United States.
    2. Reject and Loyalty or sympathy to any foreign power or Leader.
    3. Unite to defeat foreign enemies, and vote and influence to win internal elections.
    4. Show support for U.S. Allie’s and NATO – and extension of our loyalty to the United States.
    If we apply these principles, we can defeat the global communists goals to divide and conquer the United States.
    Not all is at it appears.

    • I think it’s wonderful that the United States was working on having a much better relationship with Putin being in charge of Russia. I don’t care that he was characterized as a Christian. Just as I don’t care that the leader in North Korea, I assumed is characterized as an atheist. It is better for the United States to have good relations with countries that have atomic bombs. Especially any country who puts their atomic bombs on top of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

      The neo cons hated President Bush when he drove around in his SUV, with Putin on the Bush Ranch. And the neo cons hated President Trump when he met with the North Korean leader. And these are the same ones who also call themselves, “pacifists”, and “anti-war”. And this is why I’ve been saying for many years now, that there is no anti-war movement in the United States.

      It says quite a lot about the Libertarians liberals in the left, who couldn’t bring themselves to praise President Trump. As he stepped into the DMZ to speak with the North Korean leader face-to-face. I don’t believe the Three L’s are anti-war at all. But they are certainly pro legalizing marijuana intoxication. And that is something the President Trump will never sign into law. Which is why they hate him so much.

      • the left hates Putin…the right not so much…but he’s certainly fucked things up lately…does he have any friends left?…

  11. Well, white people of German and Italian ancestry also had their guns confiscated in 1942. And yes I know you didn’t learn this in school. But you did learn that the Americans of Japanese ancestry, did have their guns taken by the government.

    And all three groups ended up in internment camps.

    • Also their ways of communicating were taken from them as well. Anyone who was a Ham Radio operator had their transmitter confiscated. Their fishing boat business shut down.

    • to Chris

      Your post was hilarious. Although Roosevelt was asked if he was going to put American Italians in jail he reasoned that the U.S. White population would revolt and he made a humours comment that Italians just made good singers and they were nothing to worry about. In reality only about 418 Italians were put in internment camps and many were flagged because of criminal activity not espionage. Some were forced to move out of restricted zones and it was so ridiculous some only had to move away a couple of streets over. Many Italians did have restrictions placed on their movements and they were only allowed to travel to and from work and church but went right on living in their homes.

      As far as your comment on American/Germans they at that time made up the majority of all white people living in the U.S. and they controlled most of the government on the local,state and federal levels. The American/Germans would have hung Roosevelt by his dirty balls if he had even thought about pulling off such an absurd stunt and there would have been no prisons numerous enough or big enough to put in mostly all of the white population of America into.

      • to dacian
        You sound like a holocaust denier. I know that there are many Left wing white people, who don’t care when other white people by the thousands lose their civil rights.

        I guess they are “the wrong kind” of white people.

        “By January 1942, at least 600,000 Italians and Italian Americans, some of them legal residents or even U.S. citizens, were classified as “enemy aliens.” About 1,600 Italian citizens, among them my great-grandfather, were put into internment camps in Missoula, Montana, and Ellis Island. As a result of security concerns in coastal areas, about 10,000 Italian-Americans were forced to relocate from their homes along the California coast and move inland.”

    • And if you was of German decent and got stuck in Europe your US citizenship was revoked..

      Germany created all American units to fight in Europe during the march through Europe!!

      • To JRM

        Your link had zero to do with your original statement of:

        quote———Germany created all American units to fight in Europe during the march through Europe!!————-quote

        And your other statement about Americans of German descent losing their citizenship was mostly false as well. Those few American/Germans that did lose their citizenship happened while they were in America and after they went to trial and were convicted of crimes as stated in your link.

    • “American is still friends with countries like England, who confiscated the guns of their own law abiding citizens. It happens all the time. And we are still friends with these countries.”

      DYK, just prior to WW2, the US had military plans to invade Canada, and fight a war with Britain? (Plan Red)

      Any peoples who believe that another nation is a friend, are childishly living in La La land. Among nations, there can be no friends, only temporary alliances regarding certain circumstances. For instance Germany in the last 20yrs; NATO allies, buying natural gas from Russia. Germany, sworn to defend Europe against Russian aggression, unabashedly filling the coffers of a designated enemy of Europe.

      • to Sam I am
        When candidate Donald Trump asked why are we still in NATO?
        That was a question I have been asking for over 10 years. And Donald Trump instantly became the enemy of the military-industrial complex. And that’s the kind of question that really upset a lot of the correct people.

        As president Donald Trump warned the Europeans about relying on Russian Natural Gas. And they just laughed at him. The video of it is up on the internet for anyone who wants to watch it.

        I think it’s time for the United States to cut the Europeans loose. Enough American blood has been shed on European soil for over 100 years now. We don’t need to shed any more American blood there.

        • “I think it’s time for the United States to cut the Europeans loose. ”

          That is an attractive thought line. However…

          The original land war concept of NATO made sense when Europe was utterly devastated, and Russia had massive armies that could simply overwhelm any thing a European nation (or alliance) could withstand. Then things changed.

          The utility of NATO moved from protecting devastated Europe, and into a construct where bribing Europe to not ally with Russia became a very important consideration.

          In exchange for being bribed, the bribed nations demanded security from being overrun by Russia. But, as the years rolled on, the bribed nations began to understand they could maintain secure, AND do literal business with Russia. Russia would make money (who can resist making money?), and western Europe would remain protected. Germany played the game best.

          There was a theory that an economically powerful alliance between the US and west Europe would lead to the ending of communist expansion. An subsequent political awakening that would see Russia become an anti-communist bulwark.

          “Everyone” misunderstood the power of ideology; an ideology willing to forge economic power in favor of raw power.

        • like it or not…most of our roots are there…we are and will remain culturally linked….

    • Chris, thanks for linking that. It goes into a fairly deep dive of the whole Russia-Ukraine national dynamic by folks who grew up there…

  12. I’m more interested in the image attached to the story.

    Why are four cops looking at a bolt-rifle as if it’s a cutting edge physics experiment that failed to function as expected?

    • Perhaps because just because someone is a cop doesn’t mean they know anything more about guns than doing their annual quals?

  13. @strych9
    “To *us* those small countries represent basically nothing but cost and tail-risk. ”

    Do we have any kind of consensus among the public of the US that we would do “everything” to defend those smaller NATO countries, in the event Russia continues to expand? Are the Euro nations really committed to take on Russia for absorbing Moldava?

    And why are we involved in a bar fight between two highly corrupt nations?

    • “And why are we involved in a bar fight between two highly corrupt nations?”

      At this point, I have to wonder if this is all about weakening Russia militarily and economically.

      From that aspect, it’s working well, if Russia is now down to relying on North Korea for artillery ammunition…

        • And new contracts for munitions be sent over have been issued. That includes the other NATO countries that buy those Javelin missiles and rifle and artillery rounds.

          Fresh replacement ammo to replace what we sent over, everyone wins… 🙂

      • @At this point, I have to wonder if this is all about weakening Russia militarily and economically.”

        My risk matrix tells me being involved is a risk that cannot be mitigated.

      • At this point, I have to wonder if this is all about weakening Russia militarily and economically.

        If it is then the people who thought up this plan are full blown ‘tards. This is the US government punching itself in the balls until Putin feels the pain.

        OPEC cutting output 500K-1.5M BPD soon, SPR running low to boot. “Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!”.

      • proxy wars are a way to weaken an enemy…they’ve done it to us…now we’re doing it to them….

    • Do we have any kind of consensus among the public of the US that we would do “everything” to defend those smaller NATO countries, in the event Russia continues to expand?

      I would doubt that 80%+ of the US public has considered this as a possibility. Just check Musk’s poll on Twitter and the shitstorm that has created. People don’t pay attention and those that *do* mostly fail to engage their cognitive faculties and just still with feelz. (Why do you think I talk about propaganda all the time? Starting to see how this affects your 2A, and other, rights yet?)

      IMHO, Ukraine is a sideshow for a larger war being fought mostly in the FX market(s). Putin’s target, again IMHO, isn’t Kiev or Odessa or anything like that. Physically he wants Sevastopol for obvious reasons that paralel his interest in Tartus.

      But the real fight here is a currency war. Putin probably has convinced the EU to commit seppuku vis a vis the Euro and over the longer term it would take some serious strategy to prevent this from happening to the USD in the next couple of years. The EU’s fucked at this point, that’s been obvious for several months but will become beyond obvious soon. Collapse of the Eurozone as a economic bloc is imminent, almost certainly followed by the end of the political bloc.

      Causing a massive supply issue for key products, thus generating inflation worldwide, while at the same time pressuring people to flee the Euro markets like Stoxx, the bund and other EU debt for the NYSE and UST market is potentially a brilliant way to collapse the USD as the world-reserve currency and kill the Euro along the way.

      People run to the US because it’s a safe haven. It’s been like that for a long time. However against the background of QT from the Fed combined with price hikes due to worldwide shortages of necessary inputs like natgas… That increases demand for the dollar, driving up the DXY. This, in turn, crushes emerging markets where the country in question has its own currency but has international debt denominated in dollars. Because their currency buys less USD and they already have inflation they’re incentivized short-term to print their local currency. Even if they don’t print, money’s going to pay for other things that cost more therefore paying the debt becomes much more costly.

      At a certain point the debtors walk simply away from the debt. If that happens in a large enough number of the debtors then you get a de facto debt jubilee. Then the dollar goes off a cliff and we become Venezuela pretty much overnight.

        • I personally don’t see it as evil. I see it as a smart move from someone who’s had enough of the US government’s bullshit. And, yeah, we’ve thrown a lot of bullshit their way since 2003 for no tangible reason other than our own foolish pride. Unfortunately much of the US public either eats out of legacy media’s hand or has no fuckin’ clue what’s been going on between Russia and the US for the last 19 years.

          Putin was the first world leader to call Bush after 9/11. He helped us quite a bit initially in A-stan too. He had the balls to suggest that Iraq was a bad idea and potentially illegal and he’s been on our shitlist since when he could have, at least, been a business partner.

          He knows he can’t win in a *physical* war because no one can win such a thing between the US and the Russian Federation. So, he hits us where he can do real damage sans nukes and our current leadership is too dense to even realise they’ve walked into a bear trap from which they cannot get out. Don’t print, USD skyrockets and then falls off a cliff. Print to keep that from happening and you’re doing it into an already 17%+ real inflation rate. At that point say “hello” in German because you’re going down the Weimar Road.

          Like it or not, Putin’s actually the moderate in the Russian government. That’s a fact. You do NOT want him replaced by a hardliner and if Putin goes that is exactly what you’ll get. Christ, this is the guy who said joining NATO was a serious possibility to bury the hatchet, now we’re in a proxy war with the guy.

          Anyone who’s studied Russia’s foreign policy in the past 30 years knew exactly where this would go. There are a few things that Russia will not tolerate and we went and did those things while thumbing our collective nose at the Kremlin. The last time we tried this level of fuckery the Ruskies put missiles in Cuba.

  14. Com nsidering thatESTONIA along withnthe other BALTIC STATESareon PUTIN’S Empire Buildin Map I’d say it’s a wise precaution especially and as hundreds if not thousands of Russians are crossing the border every day to avoid Putin’s mobilisation and in which you can rest assured that there will be at least a few planeted agents of the Russian and Belarussian state.

    • No one gives a shit what you say, wanker.

      Now, sod off, the adults are talking… 🙂

    • I’m sure Russia would like to plant a fifth column within Estonia (and Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, etc.) However, what you advise is equivalent to putting everyone in prison because a few are criminals.

  15. Eighty years ago, the US government, specifically Democrats, concluded that American citizens of Japanese descent were such a security risk to the country that they should be rounded up and confined to concentration camps. Estonia has good reason to fear Putin but they are now making the same mistake.

  16. “…since it greatly increases the chances of Putin using a tactical nuke if he thinks he’s losing.”

    Putin doesn’t need to be losing; he declared four provinces of Ukraine to be Russia. Any attack on Russian soil justifies use of nukes, regardless.

    Of course, the prevailing winds are west-to-east.

    Not to be a pessimist, but when one has nothing to lose, losing is not a consideration.

    • be interesting to see what our response to that would be…most likely nukes based in eastern Europe and an anti-missile system directed at russia itself…not just Iran….

      • “be interesting to see what our response to that would be”

        Yeah, it would be a big, fat, “Your move.”

        Discounting big talk, are we certain the US would respond at all? Are we certain the political leaders feel confident the populace would back a response in kind?

        If we call Putin’s “bluff”, and he has high cards, Putin instantly calls our bluff, as well.

      • ….or launching one in response…but the point of origin would have to be inside Ukraine itself…no NATO state would want to claim ownership of that…

      • Our government, by proxy, essentially told you this today with an interview with former CIA Director Petraeus.

        We would remain conventional and target the Black Sea Fleet along with ground forces, C&C, troops and materiale anywhere we could find it along the Western Russian border.

        IOW, they use tactical nuclear artillery and we up the ante to full scale ICBMs in a heartbeat when we obliterate everything we can find of Russia’s military, including inside Russia. Which has, historically, been the red line for Russia.

        • a ship is sovereign territory…that ups the ante in ways we don’t need…a measured response is what’s called for…nothing more…unless your solution for climate change is to eliminate most of us…

  17. @Chris T in KY

    Agree; the US needed England. As it turned out, the invasion of the “soft underbelly of Europe” route for putting forces on Germany’s western front proved to be impractical (the war didn’t end in Itally until May ’45).

  18. @Geoff “I’m getting too old for this shit” PR
    “Fresh replacement ammo to replace what we sent over, everyone wins… ”

    The lead-time between order and delivery isn’t zero. Replenishment will be done in batches, not singles. Time to manufacture, accumulate and deliver may present a dangerous vulnerability.

    When working with General Dynamics/Lockheed in the F-16 plant, we could deliver 20 aircraft in a month, but not two hundred. Regardless of the weapon, there will always be a backlog to be fulfilled. “Backlog” is actually a combination of quantity and time. Time is not your friend. In war, consumption rate is not predictable; replenishment is not assured.

  19. @strych9
    “So far, not bad.”
    “If being a pawn of larger countries and getting half your country blown to shit is “not bad”, I don’t want to know what “bad” is.”

    Thinking the above reply should have been directed to someone else.

  20. @strych9
    “I personally don’t see it as evil.”

    Russia invaded Ukraine; that is evil in itself (Ukraine posed/poses no military threat to Russia. The invasion was/is evil.

    Russia invaded Ukraine under the pretense that Ukraine never existed as anything but a province of Russia. One UN member invading another UN member (the Russians insisted Ukraine be a member nation of the UN, from the beginning), is evil, per UN charter.

    Both Ukraine and Russia have seriously corrupt governments. That is evil.

    Both Dims and Repubs are complicit in inserting the US into a fight between two evil nations. And that is evil.

    • Not to make light of the situation but Russia invaded a country… so what? We’ve invaded two in the last 21 years. Was that evil? Was lying our way into Vietnam evil? Is the rampant corruption riddled throughout our own state, local and federal government evil? Was tampering with peace talks between Ukraine and Russia evil?

      Much of the world would say yes to at least two of these things. They’d be in the same boat, using this term “evil”.

      Russia can do as it likes along its own border, just as we can along ours. That’s the nature of the situation. It’s not about “right and wrong”. This is geopolitics and the return of “the Great Game”. Late-20th century political *morals* have zero place in this world.

      Two things matter here. Power and the will to use that power. Just as it did before 1945. What you’re seeing now is hardly rare historically, in fact, it’s the norm.

      Russia warned us not to play games along their border and we have, by proxy, since the early-to-middle Obama years. Before that we meddled, to a lesser extent, in Moldova during the Bush years. There’s a price to pay for that kind of behavior and here it is. Don’t like it? Too fuckin’ bad. You needle people long enough you don’t get to complain about the bloody nose they give you.

      When you play this game the pols write the checks and you pay the balance. Don’t like that? Then wise the fuck up about how your country is run and spread that wisdom around, otherwise you don’t get a say.

      The absolute best we can say about the US at this point is that we need to get our own house in order before we go commenting on the situations of others, especially when we’ve spent a decade creating exactly the problem in question. You can go back to at least 2014 and find major policy analysts giving speeches at the University of Chicago School of International Affairs talking about how we were actively “leading Ukraine down the primrose path”. This is even on YouTube FFS.

      And then we intentionally scuttled at least one, perhaps two, attempts at peace treaties between Ukraine and Russia earlier this year.

      As such, we have no standing to dictate terms on this. Especially given the fact that nearly everything the current administration is doing seems designed towards a singular goal; to provoke an actual head to head war with Russia.

      All of this is happening because the US has intentionally weakened itself, and IMHO, is looking for a scapegoat for what’s coming. We’ve debased our currency, hollowed out our military, destroyed our standing around the world, abused our own people, made a mockery of our own “values” and all the while acted like we had done none of this.

      And who is to blame for this? We are. The people.

      • Russia has been evil from the beginning; remains so.

        As to historical events, sometimes evil was forced upon our concept of righteous morality. At that point, “honorable” takes a backseat, or should; “fight fire with fire”. Our historical mistake has always been some notion that because our people can adopt the ways of evil in order to defeat evil, the US is no better than the evil that caused the US to respond. Such an attitude presumes there is some sort of moral high ground in war.

        On the other hand, that same since of high morality causes the US to think of itself as the police force of the planet; sticking our collective noses where the country has no stake. And that, itself, becomes a form of evil; making things worse than would otherwise evince.

        All-in-all, humans are basically evil, regardless of nation. It is a miracle we still exist at all.

        • If we’re going to go all theological on it can we go back to 1825 positions on the topic where we have gradations of good and bad rather than absolutes of good and evil?

          Because the latter, ultimately, is a deathwish wrapped up as a virtuous moral crusade.

          This isn’t a fight you’re going to win. Pushing it will only result in more death. We’re already very, very badly wounded by our own hand and making it worse could kill 60 million of us without a missile being launched.

          IMHO, that’s really what this is about. An excuse for the thing they know they cannot stop, the complete collapse of an overleveraged US financial system.

      • some valid points made there…which is why expelling russia from the security council is somewhat hypocritical….but initiating the use of nukes might change that somewhat…

    • countries like russia and china…that have been invaded often…tend to have an overt fondness for buffer states…Ukraine just refused to follow the script…

  21. considering the pr hit russia is taking it was probably worth it….their military capability has been shown to be a hollow shell and the big, bad bear has appeared somewhat toothless….not the sort of image Putin wanted to project…

    • “…their military capability has been shown to be a hollow shell and the big, bad bear has appeared somewhat toothless…”

      As the old saying goes, “Even a rabbit backed into a corner will attack.”

      As much as I once worked to reduce Russia into a smoking ruin, I didn’t want to see the US provoke a nuclear response. Right, or wrong, the US is making dicey decisions without the overwhelming support of the people.

      • the US and Europeans can end this war tomorrow if they wish…it’s always been their call…

        • “the US and Europeans can end this war tomorrow if they wish…it’s always been their call…”

          Hardly the point, is it?

          The root question is why the US should be at all involved in a war between two countries with which the US has no mutual defense treaty? Especially two countries that are crime syndicates masquerading as nations.

          The dispute, more than anything else, rips the mask off the impotence of the UN to solve disputes between members of the permanent security council. Reality is that the UN provides no better solutions than the League of Nations. And here we are again, a web of entangling relationships poised to result in another war in Europe, begun because of the entangling relationships. Yet, the US is not united on the prospect of a wider war, much less the UN.

    • If you imagine this is true, which it well might be since everyone on all sides of this is completely full of shit, then the situation is far more dangerous than TPTB would like you to believe.

      There’s something going on here from the US side that stinks to high heaven. Putin’s a wild-eyed madman of a warlord who’s also as vicious as they come and has ~6000 nukes…

      And Russia’s losing a conventional war that increases the chances that, in a fit of desperation that madman might go nuclear…

      Yet we scuttle peace accords between Russia and the Ukes, feed a proxy war as much as we can, lure our Euro allies into destroying themselves and folks like Blinken and Biden still can’t stop talking shit and making things worse?

      At the same time that the SPR is hitting key levels, we’re low on munitions and weapon systems, have recruiting problems and are still kicking troops out over a jab mandate…

      Are our leaders completely insane, are they lying about everything including the other guy or is there some mix going on?

      Welcome to information war. Where it’s all bullshit all the time and the only downside is that you have senile puppet as POTUS who might get you killed and forget he did it.

      • “…you have senile puppet as POTUS who might get you killed and forget he did it.”

        And there’s the cold harsh truth.

        • The cold truth is that I suspect there’s a goodly part of our current government that isn’t just willing to “pay that price” but actively WANTS this outcome.

  22. @frank speak
    “…USS Liberty?….”

    That is not a simple situation. However….

    Once had the privilege to have lunch where the deputy minister for defence was present. The one thing that stuck in my mind, one of the most vivid memories of working at the F-16 plant, was hearing the deputy minister talk about the relationship between the US and Israel. In short, Israel considers every other nation on the planet to be a likely adversary, every other nation held at arms length. That luncheon completely changed my concept of the US actually being a “friend” to Israel.

    No, I don’t blame the Israelis for being distrustful of everyone else.

  23. @strych9
    “If we’re going to go all theological on it can we go back to 1825 positions on the topic where we have gradations of good and bad rather than absolutes of good and evil?”

    We can do that, but it doesn’t mitigate, justify, moderate, eliminate, evil. We didn’t get here because “good” was/is the high moral basic instinct of humans.

    I go back to my original question: Why are we involved in a fist fight between two utterly corrupt nations? Were is our moral imperative? Where is our mercantile imperative? Were is our financial imperative? Where is our existential imperative? What are we doing here. Someone please make a rational case for our involvement.

    • Why are we involved in a fist fight between two utterly corrupt nations? Were is our moral imperative? Where is our mercantile imperative? Were is our financial imperative? Where is our existential imperative?

      Because we have geopolitical interests which Ukraine is physically in the middle of.

      We don’t have a moral imperative. We have a power imperative, as previously stated.

      Our mercantile imperative lies in a series of proposed pipelines that would run through, interestingly, the very places in which we cannot seem to stop ourselves from picking fights for the last number of years.

      Our existential imperative depends on your point of view. From US strategic policy, it’s non existent until you add NATO to the mix. From a financial point of view, well, how much do you want to avoid being Venezuela and how does that fit into an “existential” view of things?

      Sans a time machine you’re painted into a corner on all points by prior the actions of midwits. At root, this is a problem that stems from hyper-financialization and idiocy in Congress mixed with the post-war Bretton Woods system. The USD is the heroin they’re addicted to, and so are the rest of us. It is threatened by goings-on around the world. And what happens when you tell the junkies the dope supply is in danger?

      Dollar dominance is what matters and nothing else. If you care about morals then you care about this because the collapse of the dollar will kill at least a billion people.

      You can look at this a few ways. From a Neolib perspective the US sacrificed itself on the altar of currency wars to prevent WWIII. It’s an unfalsifiable position but it was the goal and we didn’t get WWIII for going on 77 years now.

      You can also look at that same outcome from a pure utilitarian perspective and arrive at the same conclusion.

      But if you take a longer term view your window must shift. The American people were not asked if they were willing to take this hit and most of the rest of the world was roped into a system that became highly manipulative to the benefit of the US.

      No matter how you cut it, at this point you have to ask your moral questions in a frame which no one really has. You have to consider the history that brought us here and the ways in which we might get out. Moral questions mostly lead to solutions that cannot be actualized due to history and current circumstances and mentioning “evil” will not change this reality.

      The question at this point is how we get out of this with the fewest number of lives lost. Part of that may be giving the Devil his due. Personally, I’m not interested in killing a billion people, including half of this country just to maintain the “moral high ground”. We need to be realistic here. We caused quite a bit of this and, as such, we are bound to help solve it. Partly by eschewing moral polarity and accepting “less bad” solutions.

      • The analysis would seem to tie us, even without NATO, or the UN, to utterly defending every nation in Europe that (ever moving) borders Russia.