The Western elan of exporting democracy and universal human rights to the Rest is transmogrifying more and more into importing authoritarianism and despise for universal human rights from the Rest. The irony. — neomac

I would correct that to "The American elan". The Republicans are happily cheering to this. They will remember things in democracy like the separation of powers and corruption only if a democrat is the President. As if they lacking any morals.

Seems that the dividing line starts to be Russia-Trump vs Ukraine & Europe.

Because it likely is worse than I thought.

Trump has proposed American ownership of some of Ukraine's rare earth mineral deposits, and wants to send American troops to stake these claims. — Metaphysician Undercover

Do you have something for reference on this?

It's like selling the house for way under the market value, but then arguing that you benefit greatly from the "deal", because the new house owner accepted that you can use the lawnmower. :vomit:

Musk’s misinterpretation went viral, amplified by Trump as proof of corrupt ties between the “radical left” media and the “deep state.” — Washington Post

Not the first time when Trump finds "waste", "the deepstate" and "lousy agreements" from the decisions his own previous administration did. But who cares about the little things as those...

Now we might need to take another look at Ukraine's independence. Trump and Putin are in the midst of dividing it between themselves. We'll see how that works out. — Metaphysician Undercover

And I would be very happy if I'm wrong and it won't be as bad. Giving up on Putin and giving Putin everything, Trump can be the largest weak dick ever that has been on the US presidency. Because Trump isn't dividing anything to himself. What is he dividing for himself? He will be the biggest surrender monkey in all of history if he goes along with Putin as Neville Chamberlain had far more backbone than Trump. You see, Neville did declare war with Germany later.



But then again, he might just have a photo-op with Putin and then do the right thing and not cave in.

I don't think he'll intentionally pick Russia over UK. The net result would be the same, because of the trust issue - and his stupidity. — Relativist

In days gone by, he didn't have the power to summon Putin-the-powerful.
Now he does, both, and revels in it? — jorndoe

Few things. First about deals, Putin can immediately give him deals (read bribes) or hints of deals which Starmer cannot absolutely do. Dictators can do that. The Prime Minister of UK isn't a dictator, so Trump has a problem with that. This is why he truly can make deals with the Gulf States and Saudi-Arabia, and they surely will play along with that.

Then this mess about personal relations, personal likings and opinions. First of all, what Trump seems to totally forget is that he is the representative of his country, he's not talking as himself. Yet he is talking as he would as a media personality, not the representative of the US about the US policy. Others aren't so direct because of this, but does Trump care, no.

Let's just forget this absolute horse manure of this being a "negotiating tactic" or "4D Chess". It's simple: power simply has gone to Trump's head. He really means what he says. He truly would want to enlarge the territory of the US into Greenland, into Panama. Even to have some kind of arrangement of that wonderful Mediterranean beachfront territory named Gaza strip, without the annoying Palestinians that should go somewhere else. This is what this old man thinks, these are his true objectives. The only "negotiating tactic" is that if he cannot get these territories want he wants, he gets something else. Yet the objective is territorial expansion. There is no hiding of this truth. And this defines everything that Trump is about and what he does. Trump's total ignorance or basically hatred of a "rules based international order" can be understood from this point of view, because all those rules are in his way.

It sounds totally ridiculous, but it isn't. Republicans can attempt to waive off this as acting as in WWE Pro Wrestling, where Vince McMahon puts a sideshow to the wrestling with insane twist plots and always, always stays in character where the fictional character and reality come together. It's a show, even if accidents happen. Yet it's no coincidence that Trump has gotten into the show:



After all, it's World Wrestling Entertainment. Well, international relations isn't entertainment. It's deadly serious. And people will listen to the US president as talking the official line of the state of United States. And territorial annexations or even the talk of them are the Pandora's box that will quickly poison the atmosphere.

Diplomats are diplomatic for a very serious reason as relationship between sovereign nation states can easily sour. Hatred and mistrust can be easily created and hence the act of being "diplomatic". Foreign leaders usually try avoiding commenting the internal politics of another country. But that diplomacy can be then put aside. At some level, being "diplomatic" is stretched too much and the politician has to start to think about his or her domestic appearance. And then the gloves come off.

Secondly, the issue of Trump meeting Putin and possibly making a surrender treaty like with the Taleban in Doha:

The Polish foreign minister summed up quite well the situation in Munich yesterday, when he was asked what he would to tell Trump. Sikorsky responded, as the Polish are quite straight forward:

Biden was your successor and predecessor, but he planted the US flag in downtown Kyiv and declared on behalf of the United States that the US will be with Ukraine as long as it takes until Ukraine secures it's independence. Therefore, the credibility of the United States depends on how this war ends, not just the Trump administration, the United States itself. I would secondly tell him (Trump) that if you allow Putin to vasalize Ukraine, that will send a message to China that you can recover what you regard as a renegade province.

Sikorsky also mentioned that European control the Nobel Peace prize (which Trump, the man of peace, surely wants) and got laughs for that. Yet his statement was very clear about just what it as stake here. This seems to be missing for many Americans that consider that "Ukraine isn't unimportant and is a costly sideshow" or the kind of "forever war" that basically is done only for the military industrial complex or just go along with Trump.

With Trump acting like Trump, the US Superpower status is in a tailspin. I'm afraid that this will continue just like it has now. Some might argue that it's going to be just four years or until a heart attack of an old man, but the damage has been done. There can always come another Trump or the continuation of this hostile attitudes against the allies and basically total lack of understanding how the position of the US has depended on alliances. Just like if Russia would have a revolution tomorrow and Putin would be ousted like Assad and a pro-Western government would be formed there wished to approach the West, there would always be the doubt of how long the Westernizers are in power before the Putinist return. That change takes really decades and a real effort from the people themselves, just as with the Germans.

My take on it is that Trump has no favorites, which means he feels exactly the same about the UK or France as he does about Russia or China. — Relativist

Lol. :lol:

Seems you don't follow Trump when he sees Putin or see his "allies". Oh, he has favorites.

Trust me, when he believes Vladimir Putin more than his own American intelligence services, that tells something. Now he wants to have Russia (and Putin) back on the G7 (making it again G8). And he is constantly talking to Putin and now meeting him to talk about Ukraine, not with Zelenskyi. And he never says any slightest critique about Putin. Never. The guy has an abnormal fascination on Putin, starting when he tweeted that would Putin be his new friend when hosting a Beauty peasant competition, Miss Universe, in Moscow. Putin didn't see him back then... back then he was a not important.

Some expected him to announce a massive withdrawal of troops from Europe. That didn't happen. Yet. — frank

Trump is the only declaring anything in this administration. But it's great days for Russia and China as Trump is rapidly eroding the US position.

(South China Morning Post, 4th February 2025) US President Donald Trump’s spending freeze for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) could allow China to fill the resultant gap under the aegis of its Belt and Road Initiative, analysts said.

The 12-year-old initiative provides low-interest loans for highways, ports and power plants in scores of developing countries – many of which are also recipients of funding from USAID, an agency whose operations Trump halted this week.

Countries reliant on the 64-year-old aid programme may turn to China for support or other concessional investments in infrastructure projects – unless China offers first.

“There is a vacuum,” said Sharif Naubakhar, a professor of public policy at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. “Even though the belt and road is not aid, it is infrastructure, it is energy, clean water.”

China would be a “winner” of the USAID closure as it seeks “access to vital resources abroad” and tries to “build alliances that are not in US national interests”, said Cornell University applied economics and policy professor Christopher Barrett in a statement on Monday.

Economically troubled Bangladesh is likely to be among the first to approach China if USAID pulls out, according to a January 29 analysis by the Council on Foreign Relations, a US think tank.

Trump really wants to please both the leaders of Russia and China.

Fusing defence industries would favour the rise of military-industrial complex lobby which may the necessary step to build a valid political and military deterrence against hostile powers. It’s also economically important to preserve a unite and dynamic market and technological development to compensate for the demographic and morale decay of spoiled Europeans. — neomac

And that's the issue that should be done. But there are good prospects for this. Assuming there's the will to do it. Just take for example drone warfare:



Europe has totally the ability to bypass American arms manufacturing and not be dependent on the whims of the American president.

Vicepresident Vance gave a speech, well a scolding lecture, where he told Europeans that their threat isn't external, but basically their "pinko-liberalism" and the threat to free speech (from an administration that is defining words not to be officially used). Basically an endorsement for the AfD, just like Musk.

Here's the response from the German Defense Minister. He had a planned another speech, but had to reply to Vance. Notice that he answers to Vance in German (4 min), then continues with English the prepared speech. Worth listening to the rest of the speech (which could be in the Ukraine thread).

Just because I'm uncomfortable with something doesn't mean that I oppose it. — BitconnectCarlos

Tells a lot. So you are uncomfortable with ethnic cleansing, but think it's an OK thing to do.

Sometimes I toy with the idea that certain cultures just ought to be vanquished on behalf of their own wickedness. — BitconnectCarlos

Then you have absolutely no problem of understanding Nazi ideology, because that's the way exactly how they thought. Some may have been "uncomfortable" in the process, but hey, the end justifies the means.

I'll just end here with that I'm categorically against your thinking. There are ample examples that once conflicts are over, people can adapt to peace. Yet then it's a military that is vanquished, or a political movement that has ended up in failure. Not a culture. The idea of perpetual war between "cultures" is a strange and dubious idea, because in the end you are talking of people that basically just want to live their life. I think your view of the "wickedness of some cultures" is one of the most dangerous in this World and will spread destruction and death in further conflicts. Because military conflict isn't seen as an extension or outcome of political disagreement, but a way to attack whole people constituting a culture. The objectives are war aren't as Clausewitz put them, but something of the lines of the Roman saying: "Create a desert and call it peace". If ethnic cleansing is OK, it isn't a big leap to genocide.

Yep, some new member would be immediately banned.

Interesting and well-written perspectives? What’s the thread coming to?

Anyway — how seriously do we take anything Trump says? Words and posturing matter, given the US’s stature, but I can’t see Trump allowing Russia to annex Ukrainian territory and permanently shelving NATO membership — which is likely be non-negotiable aspects of any settlement. Hegseth has asked already walked back statements re: NATO. — Mikie

Which btw just shows how poor Hegseth is as secretary of defense as first impressions matter. That your first thing you say to NATO members you have to walk back tells a lot. But perhaps it's the genius of Trump. Maybe Trump just wants his underlings to parrot his talking points... perhaps make them more coherent and thoughtful.

Yet the damage is done. Hardly anyway now to think that this card, possible Ukraine NATO option, could be put on the table again. Why it was so damning, to say that Ukraine won't be a member state, is because it goes against the idea of NATO's article 10:

The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.

Any European State ought to be capable of joining if it meets the criteria. Already from article 10 we can see that it's really complicated for Ukraine to become a member, but saying it aloud is just giving Putin what he wants.

You might think that this is a tiny issue. It isn't, it truly isn't.

When Putin demanded that Russia ought to have a say what members are accepted to NATO and what not, that was the red line for Finland. By this demand Putin put Finland to immediately to start the process of joining NATO membership and Finland pushed also to Sweden to seek the membership. And it went through the Parliament with vast majority once the conventional invasion of Ukraine started.

You see, we were happy to wiggle around without being in NATO and having only an option to join NATO. Give us a space to wiggle, we Finns will wiggle, but take that wiggle space away and put us into a corner, we are far worse than the famous cornered rat. Ask Stalin how annoying we can be. With this demand Putin only showed the corner and that was enough for the Finnish leadership.

Perhaps politicians will not take seriously everything what Trump say, but they simply cannot think that it's all bullsh 4D-Chess playing. Perhaps Trump just wanted to give the middle finger to outgoing Trudeau with his talk of Canada become part of the US. But those kinds of "gestures" do have effects. There is a reason for diplomats being "diplomatic".

That would sound more promising. But once NATO is gone and won't be replaced by some comparable EU collective defence, not sure if the EU will survive. Imagine if countries like Hungary or whatever that swim in the other direction, will continue to do it also aver security matters e.g. by hosting Russian military bases. — neomac

Only Trump can really end NATO. I think Europeans have still a love affair with NATO and when Trump is against it and hates it, it will be there for the Europeans as this organization from a more peaceful past. Likely it will exist as an option, if the US notices the mistake it's making and will come back. But still, Trump hasn't left Europe.

What is likely to happen that Europe will rearm... with European arms. Likely event what Trump with all his hostility will make is that US arms industry will suffer a lot in the future. After all, the US cannot be trusted, so why would you then buy weapons from there?

But you are right that the way of appeasement might indeed what many countries will opt. Russia's objective is to have the ability to approach every European country individually as then it is in the position of strength. And that's why Putin absolutely hates the EU and NATO and the dissolution of the two is his goal.

I've been hammering on the EU leaving NATO since then as the only reliable way forward for our security. — Benkei

EU isn't part of NATO. Remember Ireland and Austria, Benkei. And Sweden and Finland haven't been long in

And even EU might be far too cumbersome. The European family is just too big to work as a team. There will be always some country like Hungary or whatever, that swims in the other direction. Far better is simply a loose but working coalition of countries. NATO countries around the Baltic and the North Sea would be a great start.

Like we, uh, actually have already where both of our countries are operating: the JEF

The JEF is a coalition of ten like-minded nations (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, UK), comprising high readiness forces configured to respond rapidly to crises. It can integrate into larger international operations such as those led by NATO, the UN or other security coalitions and can conduct the full spectrum of operations. It enhances the deterrence messaging of NATO and provides agile, credible and capable forces in support of JEF Participant Nation interests.

Basically JEF was a move to make non-NATO Sweden and Finland to co-operate in the defense of the Baltics, yet the emphasis should be in creating deterrence, not having a forum to talk. There are enough of those. Like minded nations is the key. What actual important player missing is Poland, because Poland is going to have one serious military in the future. France and Germany? Well, the EU has been lead by those two nations and Germany seems not to capable of taking defense seriously.

Others? Now I don't have anything Spain or Spaniards and well understand that the security environment next to the volatile North Africa put's Spains focus totally somewhere else. And it's understandable (as the country actually has territory in Africa).

Russia has released 1 or 2 American prisoners. — BitconnectCarlos

Don't forget that Putin said that he wouldn't have invaded Russia if Trump would have been POTUS. (If you believe that, I guess you're the someone that people should sell real estate in Florida...)

I have no issue with Ukraine defending their borders, but it was getting quite expensive for us here in the US. I don't mind if Europe picks up the slack on the funding. The conflict seems fairly far removed from us here in the US. — BitconnectCarlos

Europe seems fairly far removed removed from you there.

If Mexico or Canada were to join an anti-US alliance or if Russia were to station its troops in either of those two border countries it would be alarming so their concern is understandable. Europe should be able to hand this one. — BitconnectCarlos

Right, so when you would have Russian forces on your borders, that would be alarming for you. So I guess not much else would alarm you. Only then it would be useful to find somewhere the old and dusty WARPLAN RED for invading Canada.

Let's think about this from another angle. So you've been with someone for many decades and find that actually, you want some space, need to go alone for a while and be on your own. Now what do you call it? I guess the term usually used would be 'brake up'. Fine, these things happen. Yet, do you really think that it won't have an effect on your relationship with this someone? Everything will be just fine and dandy like this. Or if you would need this someone, she or he will be there to continue as if nothing happened.

Simply put it: appeasing your enemies that think you are an existential threat for them and then bitching to your allies and telling they don't matter and you aren't going to be there for them, simply isn't a winning strategy. Just why emboldening your enemies and alienating your friends will work, I don't know.

Yet I guess it works well when you have the right mix of delusional aspirations and ignorance.

This doesn't seem to be, as is often the case, a conflict between America and Europe; but appears to be a fundamental rupture. — Benkei

Nobody officially wants to talk about this, but it's obvious that now the security environment of Europe is rapidly changing. Trump is really doing a monumental change in Europe as many countries have truly rested their defense and security on NATO and international cooperation.

Just as Trump doesn't have a clue on the Palestinian history of the "Naqba", he doesn't understand that many Palestinians were fooled to seek refuge somewhere else as the war (of 1948) was fought and thought they could come back as the fighting has ended. Since Trump has confused the Baltic and the Balkans, thought that Finland is part of Russia etc, it's no wonder that he can come up with such delusional ideas as the Mar-a-Gaza solution. And similarly he can easily think that there's no problem with him and Vlad having a chat on what sphere belongs to whom. Why would he care about territorial sovereignty, about the little countries in Europe? After all, likely he doesn't know what Molotov-Ribbentrop pact meant for many countries. Hence when Trump in Saudi-Arabia decides things with his friend, Putin, and then (likely) announces the things for Ukraine to take it or be the real problem in the conflict, he likely won't understand what this will mean.

In fact, your country is the perfect example of this, because for Netherlands Atlanticism and the EU have been the cornerstone of your defense policy. The country has solely relied on NATO even with being surrounded by allies all around and this has been in historical terms a very peculiar arrangement, where sovereign states have voluntarily given their defense policy to a treaty pact. Yet it still during the Cold War Netherlands a large army and conscription. (And actually still have the latter, even if after 1997 the compulsory requirement for conscription has ended.) Now this security agreement obviously has to be reformed. Trump isn't a bug, it's a feature in US policy and Europe simply cannot rely on the US to be there, even for it to understand how important for itself is to have all the European countries as it's allies. The talk of the US leaving NATO has been a theoretical possibility, but now is becoming a genuine possibility. Perhaps the country that truly feels things changing is Denmark, which has been a loyal NATO member. Needless to say, no politician wants to talk about this idea from Trump.

Meanwhile, Trump’s followers seem to idolize him, but he is proving to be an exceptionally weak leader and a shitty negotiator. — Benkei

Remember Brexit. The British are usually sane and informed people, aren't they? At least more informed than the average American (people here are far more informed). Yet Brexit happens and the Brexiteers were cheering for all that freedom they would enjoy after breaking the shackles of Brussels. Same as with the Brexiteers: do they care about the real negotiations and the real economy going south? Nope! They are mesmerized from the fact that Brexit went through. And so does Trump's second term look for the Trumpists. Trump is a cult. You have now freed Jan 6th rioters telling that they will die for Trump, if they have to. Every negative thought or remark is just Trump derangement syndrome.

And if people think, "Well, it’s just Ukraine," then I think we need to remember that in December 2021, Russia issued an ultimatum demanding the withdrawal of NATO troops from Eastern Europe. — Benkei

Yep. Russia will be on the roll when Trump puts them on that course.

And you cannot make this up, it's so hilarious:

Remember when Trump ridiculed the idea of tanks running on electric motors as obvious woke nonsense? See here starting at 1:00:



And now, the Defense Department is buying 400 million worth of "electric armoured vehicles" from Tesla. :rofl:

And uh oh, as that doesn't look good, so they ditched the "Tesla" and just use a generic term, but who on Earth thinks there's going to be any bidding process. Those contracts are the reason Elon is so interested in working at the White House. :wink:

(The Guardian, 13th Feb 2025)The US Department of State has removed the name “Tesla” from a list of planned purchases, after an earlier version of the list said it would spend $400m buying new electric armoured vehicles, even as the carmaker’s boss, Elon Musk, leads efforts to slash government spending under Donald Trump.

A procurement forecast produced by the department showed the $400m (£320m) proposed spending on “armoured Tesla (production units)” in December. The most likely Tesla model was the Cybertruck, the company’s electric pickup, given Musk’s claims that the vehicle is bulletproof.

However, a spokesperson for the department said the document was incorrect, and should have been a generic entry reading “electric vehicle manufacturer”. The department said the order was on hold.

Nevertheless, the listing raises the possibility of more conflicts of interest for Musk, who is one of the biggest beneficiaries of US government contracts through the companies he controls.

And as Elon's Tesla cars are facing hard times as it is now a political statement to buy a Tesla, Elon surely will need those government contracts for sure!

Another day in Corruptoland...

I'm as uncomfortable with forced deportation as anyone. — BitconnectCarlos

Really? Are you? So you oppose the Trump Mar-a-Gaza plan?

So you would be pro-Israel if all the dead were men who were involved in 10/7 or Hamas members? What of Hamas members who weren't involved in 10/7? Would those be valid targets? — BitconnectCarlos

Usually in war it's the combatants that one fights. Yet not all the dead are Hamas members and not all buildings destroyed in Gaza were military positions were Hamas fought from.

Doubt would be good here. Look at how brilliantly it well the peace deal he made in Afghanistan went. Then also the Republic of Afghanistan was totally sidelined and truly given a stab in the back. And btw some Afghans that worked for the US and did get the chance to flee Taleban rule might now be sent back to Afghanistan.

Afghans who fled their home country after the Taliban’s return to power in 2021 are pleading for the United States to reconsider a decision cancelling all existing refugee resettlement efforts.

On Wednesday, reactions continued to pour in against an executive order Trump had signed two days prior, on his first day in office.That order called for the suspension of the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), which processes refugees for resettlement in the country, starting on January 27. All applications and arrivals through the programme have likewise been suspended.

But the sudden halt to USRAP has left Afghan refugees — many already approved to enter the US — in limbo, facing instability and the threat of violence.

At least the last time the US lost a war, it didn't send back South Vietnamese refugees to the Communists. But that was then and now it's different with Trump.

Last I checked, his supporters wanted him to address high prices and immigration while downplaying the possibility he'd do the rest. — Mr Bee

He's doing a brilliant job in keeping prices high and making them higher.

The January 2025 Consumer Price Index (CPI) report surprised to the upside, as the headline figure rose by 0.5% month-over-month (MoM) and core CPI (excluding food and energy) rose by 0.4% month over month.

These monthly gains have led to a modest firming in the year-over-year (YoY) rates, bringing the headline CPI to 3% YoY and core CPI to 3.3% YoY.

But Trump can surely get the prices up from just 3%. I'm sure he will get that inflation higher. After all, he promised you higher prices, more taxes on what you buy!

That's what you so much wanted, right?

What really doesn't sound good is idiot Trump meeting Putin in Saudi-Arabia. Guess next he'll meet with Putin in the US. Because, why not.

U.S. President Donald Trump said Wednesday he expects to see his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Saudi Arabia for their first meeting since the Republican took office.

Trump made the remarks following an almost 90-minute phone conversation with Putin in which the two leaders discussed ending Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

“We ultimately expect to meet. In fact, we expect that he'll come here, and I'll go there, and we're gonna meet also probably in Saudi Arabia the first time, we'll meet in Saudi Arabia, see if we can get something something done,”

Actually a great move from the Saudi leadership. What do they care about European problems, but likely with this move they appease enough Trump, because hell no they will do anything on the braindead Trump suggestion of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians added with seaside property development. So better to give a stage for Trump to think about something else.

At worst, Trump's going to fuck this up too like he did with the Taleban. I fear it's going to be like in Helsinki last time. Then it really was like the Soviet leader (Putin) meeting the leader of East Germany or some satellite nation of the Soviet Union. It was so crazy and the craziness just deepens.

— hypothetical news headline — jorndoe

Trump really should think about selling California. All those Democrats leaving the Union would be absolutely great for him! All those liberals with their DEI stuff, ugh! All good Republicans have already moved to Texas, so why not? California just has brush fires and nasty democrats. A Great Deal for Trump!

But seriously. There really is the possibility we can witness the self-inflicted collapse of the last Superpower. Basically European countries doing first what France did and then simply NATO and the Atlantic tie is between Canada and the EU. And then NATO is something like CENTO or SEATO. Sounds absolutely crazy, but we live in crazy times.

Hegseth just threw Ukraine under the bus. Who needs enemies when there's the USA? — Benkei

On another note... When someone pushes for peace, not by stopping the attacker, but by stopping the defender, then something's amiss. — jorndoe

Well, there has been always the possibility that Trump will fuck it up as he did with the surrender deal to the Taleban where he did through Afghanistan (and other allies like NATO) under the bus. (Yet in truth he needed Biden to finish up it to be a total catastrophe, so Trump isn't there the only one to blame.) The worst case is that general Kellog, who would be a competent negotiator, is pushed aside and Trump wants to "be in charge" of the negotiations. And then we will get something as the idiotic braindead Mar-a-Gaza . Putin knows how to stroke Trumps ego well enough (with saying the lie that with Trump he wouldn't have invaded Ukraine).

Yet that's a possibility still, not what has already happened. But surely a thing that the pro-Russian Putin supporters will drool on.

Already Trump is giving away the bargaining chips and the fact is that Russia would negotiate in earnest for a peace/ceasefire deal only when there would be the possibility of military defeat. Otherwise it's a negotiation of getting something they couldn't otherwise win. In any other situation, the war continues and Putin doesn't give a shit about negotiations.

The fact is that Russia is very limited in it's capability to make large scale attacks into Ukraine. Ukraine can hang on. That is of course, if Ukraine gets military support.

More reason for Europe to really wake up.

Yet that it's a new situation is obvious. New situation, new ideas:

Hobbes can safely be considered "conservative" in his call for Monarchy as the best kind of government. — Paine

One should remember the context of Hobbes, who lived through the English Civil War and saw how Commonwealth of England performed with it's lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell, at it's helm (even if in exile). As a teacher of Charles II, he might have personal experiences and relations (people that he was with) that made him think like this.

They will probably only try to unwind some of DoE's enforcement mandates and side programs. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Anything even close to reeking to DEI or something like that has to naturally go.

And, while reforms to the student loan process would be welcome, simply revoking access to credit overnight won't work. It would have a massive effect on the university system and leave people part-way through degrees stranded, curtailing the supply of new doctors, engineers, etc. So, I imagine they will have to tread much more carefully here. — Count Timothy von Icarus

I'm not so sure just how careful they will be. One thing is simply is privatization. Can the services that the Department of Education gives be sold to the private sector? I can vision how this goes: the whole system is "wasteful" as there are so many federal employees working in the system handling these issues. So can everything be then outsourced? Can a company from the private sector do all this? That is the idea and then it's not part of government. Ah, the savings, the cutting down of waste and smaller government!

You might find that it’s actually quite difficult to incite people to do anything, let alone something illegal.

That’s because the whole theory of incitement is magical thinking top-to-bottom. It is physically impossible to animate someone with your words and to suggest that one can is tantamount to sorcery. — NOS4A2

Impossible? So, according to you it is impossible to incite people to do something illegal? Well, there are many examples of this magical sorcery (according to you) in history, as @Count Timothy von Icarus already mentioned.

During the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, observers emphasized the role of media propaganda in inciting Rwandan Hutus to attack the Tutsi minority group, with one claiming that the primary tools of genocide were “the radio and the machete.” As a steady stream of commentators referred to “radio genocide” and “death by radio” and “the soundtrack to genocide,” a widespread consensus emerged that key responsibility for the genocide lay with the Rwandan media. Mathias Ruzindana, prosecution expert witness at the ICTR, supports this notion, writing, “In the case of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, the effect of language was lethal . . . hate media . . . played a key role in the instigation of genocide.” Legal precedents from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) solidified this view as doctrine, finding that certain public statements by Hutu political leaders and RTLM radio broadcasts constituted direct and public incitement to commit genocide against ethnic Tutsis.

Well, Ur-Trumper Steve Bannon has already had his ire raised and proclaimed that Musk should be "deported back to Africa." — Count Timothy von Icarus

With USAID the Trump supporters can be enthusiastic. I can fully relate that in Finland too: one certain crowd would be very happy if ALL developmental aid for Third World countries would be ditched by my country. And when Elon and his happy wrecking crew comes close to things that actually some Americans like and need, then it's going to be quite different.

The next thing will be if the department of education is axed. This is a very popular topic in libertarian and Republican circles, even before Trump. To abolish the department has been actually tried many times, but Congressional approval for that might be tricky. Elon being this crazy billionaire with an ax might simply cut off funding or severely limited it. Yet here's the issue: if it's the Federal government wanting to limit it's role and off-loading things to the states, that's just basically an internal role change. But as Elon's issue is to "cut waste", then just what will be cut will have effects in the US, not in Africa as with the case of USAID. And here the transfer of such authority to the states will likely not get at all any thought from the demolishing team that DOGE is. As if they would listen to the "Deep State", the enemy, in this issue. The effects can be a disaster, which some Trump voters with children might notice later.

“The promise to dismantle the Department of Education has gotten the most headlines, but other promises are more likely to happen – and happen more quickly and be more impactful,” Welner says.

“Scrapping the Department of Education would be chaotic, complicated, and it would surely result in damage to the smooth running of important programs for K-12 students and those at colleges and universities. But moving people and programs from the Department of Education to other departments doesn’t in itself change what the federal government does. It’s those other proposals that change what the government does that are likely to be more impactful.”

Mike J. Sosulski, president of Washington College in Maryland, says the Education Department demonstrated a lack of communication and responsiveness under the previous Trump administration, which he worries could resume.

“It seems that the Trump administration's approach last time, under Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, was to simply not fill many of the posts in the agency,” he says. “So the result of that was when members of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities would attempt to contact people in the DOE, oftentimes there really wasn't anyone to speak to the way there used to be under the Obama administration. And all administrations prior to that, actually, since the inception of the agency.”

See What Happens if the Education Department Is Dissolved?

So one can ask for starters, are there things like a need to have any coordination between the states on educational programs? If not, absolutely not, then it might not be so bad. I still think there are indeed things to be coordinated at the federal level, like that the education given in one state for lets say college level is similar with another state and it's colleges. I think that was the whole reason for the department to exist in the first place, not for poor regions to have far worse educational systems than more prosperous areas.

There goes the goodwill that people feel for the US and are thankful for. And seems like both Jordan and Egypt have said no to Trump's insane "Mar-a-Gaza" ethnic cleansing plan.

But how long will that take for GOP to notice the bad outcomes. Just as with Brexit, the Brexiteers were for years ecstatic about leaving the EU and dismiss very much the economic problems it caused. Naturally these were only surfaced after the Labour administration took charge.

One thing indeed can be that not only it's a "revolt of the judges" that happens, it can be also a "revolt of the states" that will happen. At least the 23 that are lead by Democrats.

And of course the global trade war is very likely happen as Trump has made global tariffs of 25% on everybody on steel and aluminium. Not going to end here. Might be a good time to sell stock and simply buy gold. Because Trump has no idea just what is the history of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs in the 1930's, which worsened the 1930's depression. The tariffs then were actually smaller than the 25% number that Donald seems to love.

The Smoot-Hawley Act increased tariffs on foreign imports to the U.S. by about 20%. Over 25 countries responded by increasing their own tariffs on American goods. Global trade plummeted, contributing to the ill effects of the Great Depression. More than 1,000 economists urged President Hoover to veto it. Hoover's successor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, worked to reduce tariffs and was given more authority to negotiate with heads of state under the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934.

If there is one thing that we should have learned from the Smoot-Hawley tariff experience, it is that tariff wars are a lose-lose proposition for the world economy.

By inviting retaliation in the form of reciprocal trade restrictions, international trade gets disrupted significantly. That inflicts real pain on all countries’ export sectors.

That, in turn, imparts an adverse shock to their overall economies. Almost all economists agree that Smoot-Hawley was a significant contributor to the length and depth of the Great Economic Depression.

But when we don't know or care about history, we will likely repeat the mistakes of the past.

The judiciary is the last bastion, but my sense is that Trump will flout these rulings, and the Courts don't have any real power to enforce them. There will be much moaning and gnashing of teeth in the media, but Musk will simply brush it aside. At that point, it will, at least, have been made manifestly obvious that the President and his main collaborator are operating in defiance of the law. — Wayfarer

Do you know how long it takes a court case to go to the SCOTUS? I don't, but I assume it does take time. And that is Musk's plan. He has been quite open of his plans before the Trump debacle started: that they'll end funding for everything, then if something is really, really needed, that can be reconstructed and refinanced then.

Above all, let's just remember one person that has had personal experience from the courts: Donald Trump himself. He's lost, he's won and he has avoided a lot, yet he gives a lot of importance to courts. A true fascist wouldn't care much about the courts, the important thing would be the raw power, the military, the intelligence services and the security forces. I'm not so sure if Trump really can just fire all the judges and replace them with lawyers totally loyal to him.

What Trump can find helpful are the powers given to the President, if there is a huge economic shock. Let's just remind ourselves what power the US Constitution gives to the President in normal times:

Article II grantsthe President the authority to:

• act as Commander-in-Chief
• grant pardons
• make treaties with the approval of the Senate
• nominate Cabinet members, Supreme Court justices, and ambassadors for confirmation
by the Senate
• appoint lower-level government officials without Senate confirmation, and fill higherlevel executive branch vacancies when Congress is in recess
• suggest new laws
• receive foreign officials
• enforce the laws that Congress passes.

It doesn't give the President economic powers, however these have been granted to the President, if he decides to call it an "emergency". A very much used "emergency" is to handle foreign countries:

the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) was to allow
the President to regulate international commerce once a national emergency has been declared.
Today, the IEEPA is used with respect to many countries around the globe. There is currently a national emergency signed by President Biden, namely Proclamation 10371, against Russia in response to the nation’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. On April 3, 2014, President Obama issued Executive Order 13664 in order to place economic sanctions on individuals in South Sudan due to the South Sudanese Civil War. Most notably, the longest-standing national emergency was declared in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter against Iran through Executive Order 12170. The order has been freezing Iranian assets for over 40 years in response to the Iranian hostage crisis and has been renewed by subsequent presidents.

And this is what Trump is already using. But it doesn't end there. In a trade war, Trump can do things just how he wants:

The President also has the authority to declare trade sanctions on a foreign country or person. According to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA), the President is authorized to declare a national emergency for any "unusual or extraordinary threat" to national security, foreign policy, or the economy if the threat is created in "substantial part" by a foreign nation. The President, bypassing Congress's approval, may impose sanctions that freeze the target's assets that fall under U.S. jurisdiction and prohibit any person or institution from transacting with the target of IEEPA sanctions.

Also in an national emergence, he can simply shut down everything. Banking and money transfers can be regulated by Trump.

During a state of national emergency, the President has the power to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to regulate and restrict the transactions of any member bank of the Federal Reserve System. Should any person violate these restrictions, they will be subject to a fine of up to $10,000 and possibly imprisoned for up to ten years. Additionally, the Comptroller of the
Currency can declare any day a legal holiday for national banking associations in a state due to emergency conditions,such as natural disasters, riots, wars, etc. Essentially, by declaring a state of emergency in a state, the President has the power to shut down the movement of moneys through national banks in the affected region.

I think Congress will eventually fight to get the power of the purse back. The loss of institutional knowledge and structure, however, will take decades to repair if the Musketeers succeed. — Paine

Even more will happen with international relations... as things are going. Europeans at least have internalized that the US might not be there. This has gotten even into popular culture, where if a crisis is depicted to happen in a NATO country, the US is portrayed to be absent or totally passive and NATO won't work (which is great for the story line). And one emerging view is that the Euro-Atlantic link, which has been so important (and what Russia's the ultimate goal is to break), might finally been over. Of course this isn't reality yet and we should remember just for how many decades now the imminent collapse of the EU itself has been predicted. So it's at this moment it's more likely that NATO will prevail than it would be ditched and become part of history like SEATO or CENTO.

How Times of India views the development:


A possible trade war won't help this. Likely the discourse will change on the European side too. Good example is Justin Trudeau, whose popularity has increased after talking tough back to Trump (even if the conservatives are still ahead) and is now telling that Trump's annexation dreams of Canada have to be taken as real. As we are preparing for the next round of Trump tariffs and for the 30 days to expire, I think it's likely that we get the trade war.

Of course after the Trump administration things can change with the Democrats trying then to roll back everything that Trump has wrecked, but likely the damage has then been already done: one simply cannot count on that the US will be there as an ally. Even if Trump is out, a similar politician might come to power in the future. This is unfortunate situation where Russia already is: even if Putin's regime would collapse tomorrow and a totally new administration would come to power that would want democracy, would want to improve ties to Europe and the West and would want to discard the imperial aspirations of Putin, there would be this underlying worry that the Putinists could return. The "Westernizers" could fall from power and the hard-line would take power again. It took a long time before Germany erased the worries about Nazis taking over Germany again.

The willingness of the GOP to go along with the demolition will be tested when their dependence upon federal spending is revealed through its withdrawal. Take, for example, the spending through the Department of Education. Here is a report on how much goes toward Red States. The States want to suckle upon that teat without the anti-poverty goals of the Feds. — Paine

Trump's popularity makes the GOP so sheepish towards Trump. Yet, if (or when) we get that trade war, the 25% tariffs raise inflation and we get a possible recession, then things might turn different. First warning sign will be if Musk and Musk's actions cause criticism. Musk will play here the role of the lightning rod. Then if things would look really bad, they GOP politicians can as easily leave Trump as they have embraced him.

You can already buy from Amazon these stickers for Tesla owners.

Time is a critical factor. If the push to remove personnel through massive buyouts allows a budget to pass that does not include certain costs, future censure will not magically provide renumeration nor restore operations that have been shut down. — Paine

This is the idea. This is why they are so rapidly trying to act without much if any thinking of what programs they cut.

Basically this is an self-coup or an auto-coup in process. It should be the Congress that decides on spending or on government institutions by making laws and through legislation. Trump is now truly trying to question this and trying to make executive orders to be legally what they aren't.

While the Trump crowd is laughing their ass off on the bizarre "Invade Greenland" and "Mar-a-Gaza" and other orders, the real issue here is the changing what in a Republic is separation of powers to a Presidency lead fusion of powers. And that of course, only if the President is Trump or at least a Republican. With a Democrat President or any from another party, naturally the GOP would be all for the separation of powers and for the limitation the executive.

Afterwards Trump can just rule by decree and doesn't have to care at all about the Congress.

Especially if/when he loses the majority in Congress.

A bit off the topic, but only in the freezing north. In the south aurora borealis don't have the color or have very little color, they look like clouds at first during the night, but you can notice the difference as the change form.

Northern Finland:


Southern Finland:

The unfortunate fact is that America has elected a President who hates Government and is also really bad at governing. — Wayfarer

Well, those that voted for him wanted that. We have already seen on term of his government, so there's absolutely no way to be surprised now on what he is doing. He just continues from where he left in the last few months of the previous Trump administration.

This seems overly paranoid — Tom Storm

Libertarian concentration camps? Yes, it seems so.

Isn't it the other way around? Without movement and changes, there would be no time.
With the objects moving in space, time was deduced from the interval of the movement.
Time is an illusion, which has no entity or existence. — Corvus

Have you considered Eleaticism? Parmenides and Zeno of Elea and all that?

Marco Rubio seems to be the only one that is a classical Republican, but he isn't Molotov enough for Trump. I assume Trump took him as to please the GOP crowd that "everything is fine, it's as business as usual". Yet just like Stalin, Trump wants and needs a Molotov as a secretary of state: a person who uses his brain only to repeat the line that his dear leader wants him to say, not a "bright mind" that would come up with thoughts and plans like some Kissinger. Above all, not a guy that would "explain" his leader behind his back and tone down what the leader wants... just as Rubio is now doing.

Trump really would like Molotov.

I guess if there's something unconstitutional about DOGE, somebody will bring a case to the SCOTUS and sort it out. — frank

Good luck with that. Let the supreme court think about it make a decision once the things have been already done.

DOGE is just an example of executive power gotten totally out of hand. Even if Trump has the GOP ruling the Congress, that won't matter. They don't plan to go by "the book". And it's totally logical, because these people do see the government as the real enemy here. It was intended so: make sweeping cuts and then look if it works. If something is absolutely needed, then get the funding back. This is the way Musk has told he will do. Sure, DOGE acts without no congressional oversight and simply doesn't take into consideration at all the separation of powers and how a republic ought to work. It's intension simply is to create havoc, that creative destruction and afterwards people can talk, but once the cuts are done, they have been done and Congress can take as de facto.

This will continue in the FBI and other places.

Hungary is perfect example of what is happening in the US. What does this mean? Well, since Trump & DOGE hasn't yet erased past US government findings, here's what the US State Department had to say about Hungary in 2022:

(US State Department, 2022) According to its constitution, Hungary is a multiparty parliamentary democracy. The unicameral National Assembly (parliament) exercises legislative authority. For the past three years, however, Hungary has been operating under consecutive states of emergency that allow the government to pass laws by edict, bypassing parliament, which elects the president (the head of state) every five years. The president appoints a prime minister from the majority party or coalition in parliament following national elections every four years. In parliamentary elections on April 3, the Fidesz-Christian Democratic People’s Party alliance led by Fidesz party leader Viktor Orban won a two-thirds majority in parliament. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe election observation mission found that the elections “were well-administered and professionally managed but marred by the absence of a level playing field” and concluded that a “pervasive overlap between the ruling coalition and the government blurred the line between the state and party.” Orban has been prime minister since 2010.

Since 2015, under a declared state of emergency prompted by mass migration, defense forces may assist law enforcement forces in border protection and handling mass migration situations. In September the migration-related state of emergency was renewed for an additional six months. A constitutional amendment from May introducing a state of emergency due to Russia’s war against neighboring Ukraine granted the government the power to rule by decree through November, which was later extended until May 31, 2023. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. There were no reports that members of the security forces committed systematic abuses, although there were credible reports that security forces assigned to the southern border abused migrants attempting to enter the country.

Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: actions that aimed to interfere with or diminish the independence of the judiciary; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media, including censorship and content restrictions at the public service media broadcaster; political intimidation of and legal restrictions on civil society organizations, as well as criminal and financial penalties for migration-related work of nongovernmental organizations; exposure of asylum seekers to risk of refoulement; corrupt use of state power to grant privileges to certain economic actors; and threats of violence and harassment by extremists targeting Roma and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex persons.

Snow is nice. It's not the snow, it's when there isn't any snow and when it's pitch black dark, wet and raining. Imagine waking up and going to work and it's dark. During the day you might see from the window that the sun came up for few hours, yet the sunrise turns into sunset quite rapidly. Then after you finish at work it is again dark. Oh boy, does it get dark. And it rains here far more than in the UK. Now the good thing is that during the summer the nights are extremely short and in the north the sun doesn't go down, but in the winter it doesn't come up. It really can affect the mood of people. It's called "Kaamos masennus" seasonal affective disorder or seasonal depression.



Many people from milder climates can really suffer, especially if they have for some reason ended up living here all alone.

Too bad then that people take seriously what an US president says. Of course the better response would never to listen to anything Trump says or tweets, just wait if an ultimatum is given to your country by the US embassador or through diplomatic channels. Only then be worried.

But when you threaten others, yeah, they'll notice that you are bully (just like Mexico and Canada showed by not basically doing much). Yet the effect is simply untrustworthiness: you simply cannot trust the US because one administration will say one thing and another something totally else. I think this view is getting very popular.

As I said. We Finns are genuinely surprised that we should be the most happy people in the World. Like, really? What the hell is wrong you with others?

I can see the link. Yeah, Bibi likely learned a lot new when listening to Trump. But it was a beautiful sound for him. Now ethnic cleansing or "moving people" is well in the Overton window of Middle-East political rhetoric.

Even if the Mar-a-Gaza project talk is ridiculous with Trump making large parts of the plan up on the spot, we still listen to what the US president says. And as I've stated, it just doesn't go off as "a negotiation tactic" or Trump playing "4D-chess". What the US president say does have consequences. At least knowing Trump.

So we can assume that once the next crisis just around the corner blows up, then perhaps Denmark can be more calm and not worrying that a NATO member state could annex by military force it's territory (which is btw goes against NATO article 1. but who the fuck cares anymore about international agreements between nation states or members of NATO). Even Panama might think they are off the hook. As if the threats are only a "negotiating tactic". But all it takes is someone to ask Trump still considers that Panama and Greenland should be part of the US, guess what he will say? Even if he can say a lot, one likely response is that both goals "are still under work".

And the damage has been done.

Yet one crucial thing didn't happen during the Financial Crisis of 2008 as did with the S&L crisis earlier is that nobody went to jail. Only one pyramid-schemer turned voluntarily himself in.

This has had very bad long term consequences. In fact, it can be one reason that we have Trump today and we discuss issues on a thread that at first you would think was about a Third World country.

You see, if I'm a banker and you don't have any money and if I this knowing give you 10 million dollars to buy a lavish condo, I am actually doing a crime. I should check if you really have collateral and not simply assume that you are rich, because you are aristocracy, a count. I might think there's no problem, if you cannot pay the debt or even the interest for the 10 million debt, the bank will just take the lavish condo and sell it for a profit, perhaps 12 million in the future. Hey, no risk! And I get my fees instantly from that 10 million loan I sold.

The fact is that with cars people might fancy German cars over American cars and like some brand, but with debt there is no "brand", just how much it will cost me and how large debt can I get for how long. If the majority of customers go to the large bank, then a smaller bank has to take other customers. Perhaps those that don't get loans in other banks. This kind of "aggressive" banking, giving a 10 million "liar-loan" is one way for banks to grow their size, but it's not legal. There are laws against this. However, in 2008 and afterwards, nobody went to jail. Not even from Countrywide (if I am correct). This sent really bad signals both to the financial sector and to the voters. Some reckless bankers getting long term prison sentences would have scared the shit out of Wall Street bankers and gotten more people to think that the system does work. Because they were angry about the socialization of the losses of the rich already.



Hence people then got excited about a billionaire (or a millionaire pretending to be a billionaire back then) who said that the system is corrupt and he knows it, because he has used it. And was surprised how his supporters were excited about slogans like "drain the swamp". And not only do we have him now again as President of the US, but the worlds richest man is happily going around "cutting waste" from the government on a purely executive order bypassing all the rules and the norms. And now some people are enthusiastic about this.

Think for a moment about it. Without time, you wouldn't see movement.

Time is an integral part of motion and movement. The coin takes time of what, one second plus, to hit the floor. Now, if it would take 0,1 seconds it would be a lot faster, likely then to be thrown to the ground, not just fall with gravity.

And seeing? Do you see gravity? Mass? Weight? And when light hits your eye's retina, that already is motion. So without motion and time, no "seeing".

Or then think about the Einsteinian bloc universe as an entirity. All of it together. Well, then there's no movement. You need time for movement, for past, present and future. Notice the word on the graph below.

Can you prove time exists? — Corvus

Can you prove that movement doesn't exist?

If there's any kind of motion, there has to be time.

I think Rubio's time as secretary of state will end sooner or later.

(BBC, Feb 6th 2025) US President Donald Trump's proposal to resettle Gaza's population would only be temporary, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said.

It follows Trump's suggestion that the US could "take over" Gaza and resettle around two million Palestinians living there – an idea that has drawn criticism from the UN, human rights groups and Arab leaders.

He, Marco Rubio, is already showing the signs of "being the adult in the room", which is highly irritating for Trump and hence dangerous for the secretary of state. Donald, as the genuine asshole he is, won't tolerate in the long run such behavior as he want only loyal sycophants that simply repeat what he says. This was already clear when Rubio met the president of Panama. Then there simply was NO talk of the US annexing Panama or the Canal Zone. Naturally the US got a deal, US warships can now pass freely the Canal, but that wasn't what Trump was talking about. Few million cheaper and a new port deal without Chinese is simply not what Trump talked about.

Trump won't have it. If this continues, Trump will simply look as foolish as he is. He blabbers every strange idea that comes to his senile mind, just like this Mar-A-Gaza idea, and then people take it Trump "playing 4D chess". Sorry, but what the US president says has to really mean what he says. There cannot be then people behind him just talking about it as "a negotiating tactic".

I'll predict that sooner or later Rubio has to go. And we will have that trade war.