On 3/27/24 7:48 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:

> This is the first time I've noticed Keith posting in this group. He
> usually hangs out in r.a.sf.fandom, but that group makes this one look
> busy, and its recently been taken over by Dr Who fans and AI generated
> posts.

If it's been taken over, I haven't noticed. I've set up filters to block
anything Dr. Who related, which may be overkill but works.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
>>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>
>>> December 1814 not count?
>>
>> I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
>> invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
>
> 1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building
> anyway.
>
> The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether
> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
> who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define
> them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history
> teacher would not do so, however.
>
>> Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
>> participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
>> flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
>> just confused.
>
> Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.

Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 3/27/2024 5:02 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>> Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
>>
>> Okay, how about Pancho Villa's attack on Columbus, New Mexico in
>> March, 1916?
>
> Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of the
> Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
>
> I seem to recall that Villa had previously been a representaive of the
> Mexican government but that at some point he had gone out on his own,
> and I think that was before 1916 but I cannot recall precisely.

I believe Villa's raid was after as part of why he did it was in an
attempt to drag the US into his conflict with the Mexican government.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>> This is the first time I've noticed Keith posting in this group.
>> He usually hangs out in r.a.sf.fandom, but that group makes this
>> one look busy, and its recently been taken over by Dr Who fans and
>> AI generated posts.

> If it's been taken over, I haven't noticed. I've set up filters to
> block anything Dr. Who related, which may be overkill but works.

I've been posting to rasfw intermittently for decades. But in this
thread I've been posting to rasff, and failed to notice that the
thread was being crossposted to rasfw. Peter is still in my killfile,
so I only see his posts when someone quotes them. As I've said
before, I'm willing to remove him from my killfile if he he emails
me an apology. (He's never been blocked from my email.)

The Who-related posts in rasff have mostly died down. Peter is right
about some of the Who-related posts being generated by ChatGPT, but
that was pretty universally condemned even by the Whovians.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
> the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?

Does it matter? If a bunch of armed foreigners working together cross
the US border to use force against Americans, that's an invasion.

In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
on behalf of the French government?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:

> On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>
>>> pt
>>>
>> December 1814 not count?
>
> It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
>
> The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
> going to get invaded again, unless we push out
> the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
> invasion was over 200 years ago.
>
> Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
> of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
> that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
> circumstance which needs fixing.
>
> Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir'
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
>
> The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.

I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who
studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the way
they do.

I think that in order to get long lasting peace in europe, the russian
people need to go through some kind of public shaming like germany in WW2
in order to create a longing for peace and democracy.

It has to come from within, based on a collective, cultural realization
that Tsars won't build a happy country. If it is pushed from above and
outside, like after the soviet union fell, the system will fall again,
since the people haven't internalized democracy.

Another way for peace, as you say, is to break up russia and confiscate
all major weapons. Moscow and the west will probably be a european
oriented country, the rest will be factured between various small warlords
and revert to their "*stan" names.

The risk will still be though, that the moscow + west will again fall into
tyranny after a decade or two.

Best regards,
Daniel

On 3/28/24 5:54 AM, D wrote:

> I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who
> studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
> paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the
> way they do.
>
> I think that in order to get long lasting peace in europe, the russian
> people need to go through some kind of public shaming like germany in
> WW2 in order to create a longing for peace and democracy.

They came close in the nineties, but Yeltsin's government messed up so
badly that they went back to autocracy, which is all that Russia had
ever known.
>
> It has to come from within, based on a collective, cultural realization
> that Tsars won't build a happy country. If it is pushed from above and
> outside, like after the soviet union fell, the system will fall again,
> since the people haven't internalized democracy.

Democracy — elected government — is just a part of something more basic.
The best word for it is liberalism, but in the USA that's unfortunately
been taken over by the advocates of heavy government in the economy.
Here I'm using it in its proper sense.

Germany had a liberal tradition to help it find its way. It was weirdly
mixed with strong monarchs, religious violence, and antisemitism, but it
was there. Frederick the Great was an "enlightened absolutist" — a
powerful oxymoron which I have an article on that should show up on
libertyfund.org later today. It was based on a somewhat Hobbesian notion
that a nation needs an absolute ruler, but the ruler is supposed to act
for everyone's good. Frederick enacted some reforms, as did Joseph II of
the Holy Roman Empire.

Russia also had an "enlightened absolutist," Catherine the Great, but
her "enlightenment" consisted mostly of promoting culture and not of
giving anyone more freedom. The Russian Revolution traded one set of
czars for another, the main difference being that the new ones were even
more expansionist.
>
> Another way for peace, as you say, is to break up russia and confiscate
> all major weapons. Moscow and the west will probably be a european
> oriented country, the rest will be factured between various small
> warlords and revert to their "*stan" names.
>
> The risk will still be though, that the moscow + west will again fall
> into tyranny after a decade or two.

Confiscating the major weapons is the real problem. Picking up nuclear
weapons and carrying them off would cause all kinds of international and
logistical issues, and someone might decide to launch them rather than
give them up. They're probably already poorly maintained and unreliable,
but that could just mean that instead of blowing up their intended
target, they'll blow up somebody else.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 3/27/24 9:30 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

> In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
> on behalf of the French government?

The Duchy of Normandy was basically an independent state at the time,
and William was its head.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 2024-03-28, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
>>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>
>>>> pt
>>>>
>>> December 1814 not count?
>>
>> It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
>>
>> The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
>> going to get invaded again, unless we push out
>> the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
>> invasion was over 200 years ago.
>>
>> Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
>> of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
>> that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
>> circumstance which needs fixing.
>>
>> Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir'
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
>>
>> The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.
>
> I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who
> studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
> paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the way
> they do.

obSF: _The Moon Goddess and the Sun_, Kingsbury was a 1986 novel that
as one thread had an immersive virtual reality "game" used for
Americans to understand this "deeply rooted paranoia of Russia" and
the related addiction to strong-man dictatorships.

The novel was actually a very good collection of ideas for the time, a
Favorite bookcase book, that failed as a novel, IMO, due to its
lack of coherence. It was an expansion of an earlier Hugo nominated
novella and added more neat ideas but lost its plot focus.

Kingsbury didn't write much but he had nice fresh ideas.

Chris

On 3/27/2024 9:26 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
> Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>> This is the first time I've noticed Keith posting in this group.
>>> He usually hangs out in r.a.sf.fandom, but that group makes this
>>> one look busy, and its recently been taken over by Dr Who fans and
>>> AI generated posts.
>
>> If it's been taken over, I haven't noticed. I've set up filters to
>> block anything Dr. Who related, which may be overkill but works.
>
> I've been posting to rasfw intermittently for decades. But in this
> thread I've been posting to rasff, and failed to notice that the
> thread was being crossposted to rasfw. Peter is still in my killfile,
> so I only see his posts when someone quotes them. As I've said
> before, I'm willing to remove him from my killfile if he he emails
> me an apology. (He's never been blocked from my email.)
>
> The Who-related posts in rasff have mostly died down. Peter is right
> about some of the Who-related posts being generated by ChatGPT, but
> that was pretty universally condemned even by the Whovians.

This is one of those petty fannish feuds that go on long beyond
reason. In this case, each of us feels that the other has wronged
them, and wants an apology from the other.

It simply isn't going to happen, and matters very little.

I'd rather people NOT respond this this post. There's no
reason to incite Keith to keep going on about it.

pt

In article <l6l7vlFn3uoU1@mid.individual.net>,
Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
>On 2024-03-28, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
>>>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>>
>>>>> pt
>>>>>
>>>> December 1814 not count?
>>>
>>> It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
>>>
>>> The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
>>> going to get invaded again, unless we push out
>>> the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
>>> invasion was over 200 years ago.
>>>
>>> Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
>>> of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
>>> that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
>>> circumstance which needs fixing.
>>>
>>> Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir'
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
>>>
>>> The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.
>>
>> I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who
>> studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
>> paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the way
>> they do.
>
>obSF: _The Moon Goddess and the Sun_, Kingsbury was a 1986 novel that
>as one thread had an immersive virtual reality "game" used for
>Americans to understand this "deeply rooted paranoia of Russia" and
>the related addiction to strong-man dictatorships.
>
>The novel was actually a very good collection of ideas for the time, a
>Favorite bookcase book, that failed as a novel, IMO, due to its
>lack of coherence. It was an expansion of an earlier Hugo nominated
>novella and added more neat ideas but lost its plot focus.
>
>Kingsbury didn't write much but he had nice fresh ideas.
>
>Chris

This might be the Finnish briefing from above; I found it very interesting:

https://ricochet.com/1214468/finnish-intelligence-officer-explains-the-russian-mindset/

I think Kingsbury's _Courtship Rite_ is a great book, but it seems to be
almost forgotten now.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:

> In article <l6l7vlFn3uoU1@mid.individual.net>,
> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-03-28, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
>>>>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> pt
>>>>>>
>>>>> December 1814 not count?
>>>>
>>>> It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
>>>>
>>>> The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
>>>> going to get invaded again, unless we push out
>>>> the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
>>>> invasion was over 200 years ago.
>>>>
>>>> Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
>>>> of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
>>>> that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
>>>> circumstance which needs fixing.
>>>>
>>>> Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir'
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
>>>>
>>>> The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.
>>>
>>> I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who
>>> studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
>>> paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the way
>>> they do.
>>
>> obSF: _The Moon Goddess and the Sun_, Kingsbury was a 1986 novel that
>> as one thread had an immersive virtual reality "game" used for
>> Americans to understand this "deeply rooted paranoia of Russia" and
>> the related addiction to strong-man dictatorships.
>>
>> The novel was actually a very good collection of ideas for the time, a
>> Favorite bookcase book, that failed as a novel, IMO, due to its
>> lack of coherence. It was an expansion of an earlier Hugo nominated
>> novella and added more neat ideas but lost its plot focus.
>>
>> Kingsbury didn't write much but he had nice fresh ideas.
>>
>> Chris
>
> This might be the Finnish briefing from above; I found it very interesting:
>
> https://ricochet.com/1214468/finnish-intelligence-officer-explains-the-russian-mindset/
>
> I think Kingsbury's _Courtship Rite_ is a great book, but it seems to be
> almost forgotten now.

Yes, looks like the one, although I watched a recorded presentation on
youtube, but the man and the content matches.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
wrote:

>On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>
>>
>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>
>> pt
>>
>December 1814 not count?

As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.

And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
people fanatically insistent on refuting it.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
>>>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>
>>>> December 1814 not count?
>>>
>>> I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
>>> invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
>>
>> 1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building
>> anyway.
>>
>> The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether
>> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
>> who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define
>> them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history
>> teacher would not do so, however.
>>
>>> Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
>>> participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
>>> flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
>>> just confused.
>>
>> Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
>
>Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.

I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.

Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?

As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.

The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted
authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
after all.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On 3/28/2024 9:21 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>> Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
>>>>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>
>>>>> December 1814 not count?
>>>>
>>>> I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
>>>> invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
>>>
>>> 1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether
>>> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
>>> who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define
>>> them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history
>>> teacher would not do so, however.
>>>
>>>> Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
>>>> participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
>>>> flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
>>>> just confused.
>>>
>>> Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
>>
>> Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
>
> I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.
>
> Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
> been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
> which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?
>
> As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
> many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
> Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
> pure and simple.
>
> The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted
> authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
> President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
> they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
> after all.

With the current SC they will try to rule such that MAGA people cannot
be barred but everyone else can be. :P

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 3/28/2024 9:14 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>
>>> pt
>>>
>> December 1814 not count?
>
> As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
> part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
> from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.
>
> And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
> people fanatically insistent on refuting it.

"Topic Drift". :)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>> Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
>> the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
>
>Does it matter? If a bunch of armed foreigners working together cross
>the US border to use force against Americans, that's an invasion.

What if it's only one armed foreigner?

>In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
>on behalf of the French government?

He was the French government. L'etat, c'etait lui.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

> As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
> many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
> Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
> pure and simple.

So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that
line too often before. "Love it or leave it."

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 3/28/24 12:14 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>
>>> pt
>>>
>> December 1814 not count?
>
> As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
> part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
> from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.
>
> And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
> people fanatically insistent on refuting it.

And now you're treating getting the month wrong as being "fanatically
insistent."

*plonk*

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 3/28/2024 7:04 PM, Gary McGath wrote:
> On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
>> many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
>> Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
>> pure and simple.
>
> So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that
> line too often before. "Love it or leave it."

Trump wasn't opposing US foreign policy. He was opposing the counting
of electoral votes, using a violent mob, because the normal operation
of government was going to put him out of power. At very least,
that's insurrection.

I really doubt that Trump actually takes orders from Moscow, but
he does seem to admire Putin, and its possible that Putin has
kompromat on him, which bends his actions even if not given
explicit instructions.

Looking at the actual law, 18 USC Ch. 115: TREASON, SEDITION, AND
SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES says:

§2381. Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them OR
[helps enemies of the US] Shal <punishments>

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=%2Fprelim%40title18%2Fpart1%2Fchapter115&edition=prelim

With that, I think you can argue that Trumps actions *might* meet the
clause before the OR. In that case, yes, he committed treason.

pt

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:44:57 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 3/28/2024 9:21 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>>> Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>>
>>>>>> December 1814 not count?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
>>>>> invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
>>>>
>>>> 1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building
>>>> anyway.
>>>>
>>>> The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether
>>>> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
>>>> who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define
>>>> them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history
>>>> teacher would not do so, however.
>>>>
>>>>> Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
>>>>> participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
>>>>> flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
>>>>> just confused.
>>>>
>>>> Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
>>>
>>> Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
>>
>> I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.
>>
>> Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
>> been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
>> which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?
>>
>> As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
>> many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
>> Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
>> pure and simple.
>>
>> The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted
>> authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
>> President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
>> they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
>> after all.
>
>With the current SC they will try to rule such that MAGA people cannot
>be barred but everyone else can be. :P

That's not what they ruled so far -- for purely local offices, at
least.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:04:27 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
wrote:

>On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
>> many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
>> Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
>> pure and simple.
>
>So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that
>line too often before. "Love it or leave it."

No -- but acting as an agent of a foreign power when you have sworn an
oath to the USA (not just pledged allegiance, sworn an oath as part of
taking an office, such as, oh, Reprentative or Senator or President,
among many others) can be, depending on what the foreign power is up
to and if you allow your allegiance to that power to influence your
official performance.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:07:56 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
wrote:

>On 3/28/24 12:14 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>
>>>> pt
>>>>
>>> December 1814 not count?
>>
>> As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
>> part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
>> from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.
>>
>> And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
>> people fanatically insistent on refuting it.
>
>And now you're treating getting the month wrong as being "fanatically
>insistent."

When did I say getting the month wrong mattered? Why /would/ it
matter? Either this is a "nigglened edge case" independent of the War
of 1812, or it is /part/ of the War of 1812, in which case it is not a
separate example from the War of 1812.

Nice try at a save, though. Just continue on with your fanaticism.

>*plonk*

I felt nothing. Sorry 'bout that.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On 28 Mar 2024 22:40:08 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>> Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
>>> the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
>>
>>Does it matter? If a bunch of armed foreigners working together cross
>>the US border to use force against Americans, that's an invasion.
>
>What if it's only one armed foreigner?
>
>>In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
>>on behalf of the French government?
>
>He was the French government. L'etat, c'etait lui.
>--scott

He was the Norman government, Philip I was the French government.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On 3/29/2024 8:55 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:44:57 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/2024 9:21 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>>> Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>>>>> Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
>>>>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> December 1814 not count?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
>>>>>> invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building
>>>>> anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether
>>>>> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
>>>>> who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define
>>>>> them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history
>>>>> teacher would not do so, however.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
>>>>>> participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
>>>>>> flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
>>>>>> just confused.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
>>>
>>> I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.
>>>
>>> Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
>>> been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
>>> which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?
>>>
>>> As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
>>> many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
>>> Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
>>> pure and simple.
>>>
>>> The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted
>>> authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
>>> President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
>>> they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
>>> after all.
>>
>> With the current SC they will try to rule such that MAGA people cannot
>> be barred but everyone else can be. :P
>
> That's not what they ruled so far -- for purely local offices, at
> least.

They're just not high enough ranked MAGA people.... :P

(Sort of like the Purge universe, you have to high enough in the
government before you are safe.)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.