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.

More importantly, what's your take? — jorndoe

Even if I consider myself a conservative, I will take the benefits of a welfare system to a system without it. The largest benefits are simply not measurable, like social cohesion, far more safety. That "happiness" that we are said to have in this country (see Finland tops world happiness ranking for 7th year in a row). Like the fact that criminals are those that really genuinely want to be criminals. The fact that there are no beggars in the streets (or if there are, they have flown from Romania here) and no panhandlers trying to make a swindle. That my 12-year old daughter is safe to walk in the city center to school and to her friends homes, which basically has the most crime in the Capital. Never underestimate, just how beneficial and awesome social cohesion in a society is.

Yes, there are also negative aspects. It is huge economic burden and someone like Elon Musk would see it as wasteful. First and foremost, once you are in "the system", apathy can really take over and you can simply get "institutionalized". Meaning that a person will look for work just for so much time. Yet when you give up, you really can give up: your won't find yourself living in the street as a hobo.

In this kind of system, a basic income might help, because otherwise you are constantly waiting for the next appointment with the social welfare employee, going on the next course or something. The universal income is not as dramatic as it sounds when you get already the assistance to having a home and the unemployment benefits perpetually, if you don't work. That adds up to an "universal income".

There's a story (that I've already told somewhere, but I'll repeat it) that a Finnish policeman I know told us about this alienation: consider you are young, but have never had a job. Then consider that your parents have never held a job. Then consider also that your grandparents have never held a job. This kind of situation isn't typical, it is the exception, but it is reality for some in Finland. How difficult, psychologically is it to then get into a work life from those surroundings? Because unemployment is still a stigma: you aren't capable enough, the World isn't made for you, stupid. It's for better people.

Financial crisis can hit individuals for rest of their lives. When we had our housing bubble/banking crisis and severe recession in the 1990's, 50 000 people from the construction sector got laid off and basically the majority worked never in their lives again. Never, straight to basically retirement. That can happen. Those people were forgotten, and it's a quite a high number as there were only 5 million people. As one person in the construction business said: a lot of the alcoholics got dumped away during that time.

Then there's the real question of time: OK, will you either live very modestly and have all the in World and be like a retired person, or will you use work a shitty job without that spare time and basically have a similar tight financial situation? Many will opt for the first option.

Because once you have that "career background", once you are a so-called professional, then it's far more easy. You can really decide which type of work you want, because many employers will want to hire you and you can simply change jobs, if you don't like it. The divide between those in the workforce and those in "the system" is huge. Perhaps not as huge as between the vagrant homeless person and the white-collar worker in the US, but still.

Ah. I don't think Fannie and Freddie caused the 2008 crisis, though. It was derivatives, right? — frank

It was a lot of things, a real witches brew. The derivatives were a major issue, but it was the entire structure of the US housing and lending market that led to the explosion of derivatives in the first place. You can add in the rating agencies too. But part of the reason that the ratings agencies, pension funds, etc. didn't worry as much as they should have is the idea of the implicit state backing for loans made by the parastatals. — Count Timothy von Icarus

It is true that Freddie and Fannie went along with the excesses (I think both directors were fired), but great example of an totally reckless actor was Countrywide, which basically had it's business model based on perpetually rising housing prices and hence was a top provider of liar loans. But hey, during 1982 and 2003, the company shares got a 23 000% return.

Besides, the real damage of a housing bubble bursting is caused from the fact that robots don't make houses in China, it is builders that make them locally and hence the market have a huge impact on the local economy and in employment. If cryptocurrencies have a devastating crash, then the effect of the crash is limited to that market and the suckers that invested them. Yet buying a home is usually the largest investment a person or a family does: have problems with that and the effect on spending and consumption is huge. Hence the effects of housing bubble bursting are simply devastating for the economy. When there's a speculative housing bubble away and growing, the whole economy of a country looks to be just awesome. Until it isn't.

I think one real issue worth mentioning is just how differently the US government reacted to the financial crisis of 2008 than it acted to the Savings & Loans crisis decades earlier. Simply put it: when it was Wall Street itself, it was socialization of the losses rather than people going to jail (as in the S & L crisis).

So yes, it was a lot of things, but simply stating that it was government run banks makes a dubious argument as if the crisis would/could have been avoided without Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae, which btw officially aren't banks in the normal definition. Yet they are worth mentioning. also.

Of course, today it might be so that the assistance of private actors and corporations might be done totally covertly even without us knowing what is happening. The US is on it's way to functioning like a Third World country in this aspect. Would we know about it, if Tesla was assisted because of falling demand creating losses for the company?

We barely got to know that the whole financial system was on the verge of collapse back then.

But at least part of the 2008 financial crisis was due to the perverse incentives faced by massive government run banks, and America's student loan crisis shows how these sorts of problems are not easily dealt with. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Nope. It wasn't government run banks that made the 2008 financial crisis. Ninja-loans happened because of the twisted incentives in the market like the other reasons for the excessive mortgage lending (like MBS etc). A very classic speculative bubble.

There is zero chance that DOGE / Musk will go after United Health Care, et al. The sort of government spending that will be sacrificed are USAID, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Public Radio, National Endowment for the Humanities. The Library of Congress? How many congressmen ever check out books there, anyway? Sell it to Amazon! — BC

Oh, those will surely go. But that won't do it. Sooner or later will come a hickup in the form of a crisis. US administrations just push it forward and hope a crisis doesn't happen on their watch.

The size of the national debt does concern me. I understand that deficit spending keeps the economy afloat, particularly, consumption.

people do consume a lot; I do my part. It's good for the economy. BUT if we wanted to tighten our belts and spend less on consumption and spend more on national debt reduction, where could we save a significant amount of money??? — BC

This will only happen through a crisis. And that crisis will happen through the markets, or as the classic political jargon is: the speculators did it and the (add here your enemy that you portray to be behind everything).

Some commentators say that Trump was freaked out by market reactions and agreed on a "30 day pause". The problem is that he cannot give up so easily his wacky ideas of tariffs. The possibility of a recession manufactured by Trump is very likely. And once the economy (US and global) is in recession, then the debt is even more problematic.

* * *

If the USAID is given to the State Department, perhaps the most destabilizing cut offs might be averted. If people think this is just bleeding heart liberals whining, not everything is DEI-nonsense, that Elon is celebrating from the shutdown:

US aid has also played a critical role in managing Al-Hol and Al-Roj camps in northeast Syria, which house over 46,000 displaced individuals—primarily women and children—from former Islamic State of Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) territories. Essential water and sanitation services managed by US-funded humanitarian staff were suddenly suspended, placing camp residents at greater risk of lack of access to safe drinking water, as well as water and vector-borne disease spread. Also alarming was the effect of the sudden pause on funding that contributes to the security and administrative management of major detention facilities holding close to ten thousand ISIS fighters in these areas, which raised concerns among counterterrorism officials about mass prison breaks and a potential ISIS resurgence.

So will Elon unintensionally help ISIS by not paying the prison guards? Syria is in a very precarious state now. These kinds of little issues are off the GOP-narrative, but small hickups like these can happen when you stop for 90 days the financing of absolutely everything. And although Ukraine likely denies it, this is hampering their war effort too, just as the last GOP halt did in the war.

Hope you get good treatment!

I think it has been discussed here earlier just why the US system is so expensive. It's when people's first contact to health care services is ER, which is the most costliest type of health care. The that the price of medication is through the roof for people (as the government isn't a huge buyer) and medication is advertized is something American and lastly that insurance companies are there to make a profit. They don't have obligations to handle part of the universal system without profit making as they do for example in Finland. Then there is inefficiency, which isn't so easy to get rid with a purge everything -mentality.

But that is not what is happening. This is like the US equivalent of Krystalnacht. — Wayfarer

That's why independent inspector generals would be a problem, as you said.

Can this be done, difficult as it is? Sure -- it just won't be done, in all likelihood. — BC

What in the WW2 example is usually forgotten is that huge change that happened of one spending totally ending, fighting the war, that opened another type of spending and demand. For example the US autoindustry stopped making cars for the public and transfered everything to making tanks actually earlier than Nazi Germany did such move! Private demand was curbed and limited, all that debt that people willingly bought war bonds went to military production of bombs and tanks. Which then totally ended once the war was over, and the millions in the armed forces went back to civilian life.

Nothing like that can happen here where the debt is basically there to uphold present consumption. And sooner or later DOGE has to look at where the actual government spending is, which isn't USAID.

Do we think that DOGE will go after enormously expensive health care spending, which first and foremost is expensive because corporations make profit from it?

What I think might bring Trump down is what I'm expecting him to deliver: an economic mess (if not catastrophe, and let's hope not). He still thinks, to this day, that the Chinese pay the American tarrifs on their exports and nobody can persuade him otherwise. He lives in an alternative reality, one devoid of fact, but the unfortunate thing is that tens of millions of people have decided to join him there. — Wayfarer

He will start to insist on the actions he talks about. No way to avoid that. This is why we will have the trade war. Rubio, clearly a normal Republican politician with a sane mind, will likely be pushed out at some time.

Let's look what actually has happened with Trump's idea of annexing Panama ...or more likely the Canal Zone.

Marco Rubio on his new job made his first trip to Panama:

PANAMA CITY, Feb 2 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday warned Panama's President Jose Raul Mulino that Washington will "take measures necessary" if Panama does not immediately take steps to end what President Donald Trump sees as China's influence and control over the Panama Canal.
Mulino, after the talks with the top U.S. diplomat in Panama City, signaled he would review agreements involving China and Chinese businesses, and announced further cooperation with the U.S. on migration, but reiterated that his country's sovereignty over the world's second busiest waterway is not up for discussion.

Here the MAGA-enthusiasts will declare victory of the Trump 4D-Chess of getting Panama to "review agreements involving China and Chinese businesses" and "announced further cooperation with the U.S. on migration" as obvious victories of the new US policy. Those are policies of a conventional Republican administration, unlike the possible annexation of the Canal Zone.

What they won't care about is that Panama's president reiterated that the "country's sovereignty over the world's second busiest waterway is not up for discussion". They won't understand that there's a price to pay for making someone do something by threatening their sovereignty. Above all, notice that Rubio didn't take up in any way what Trump was talking. Just read closely the Department of State brief about the meeting with Rubio and Mulino:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino and Foreign Minister Javier Martínez-Acha today in Panama City to address critical regional and global challenges. Secretary Rubio informed President Mulino and Minister Martínez-Acha that President Trump has made a preliminary determination that the current position of influence and control of the Chinese Communist Party over the Panama Canal area is a threat to the canal and represents a violation of the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal. Secretary Rubio made clear that this status quo is unacceptable and that absent immediate changes, it would require the United States to take measures necessary to protect its rights under the Treaty.

Secretary Rubio also emphasized the importance of collaborative efforts to end the hemisphere’s illegal migration crisis and thanked President Mulino for his support of a joint repatriation program, which has reduced illegal migration through the Darien Gap. The Secretary underscored the desire for an improved investment climate and ensuring a level playing field for fair competition by U.S. firms. The Secretary also praised President Mulino’s regional leadership in support of a democratic, free Venezuela.

Secretary Rubio expressed his gratitude for the productive discussion and underscored the United States’ dedication to making both nations safer, stronger, and more prosperous. He noted this meeting marks an important step in reinvigorating the strategic relationship between the United States and Panama, in line with President Trump’s vision.

OK. Is the annexation of the Canal Zone even been spoken of? NO! Such absurd ludicrous issue is not mentioned here, and what is likely simply been dropped is the Panamian insistence, which likely was said, that they have sovereignty to their own territory.

It all might go under the radar for a while, but in the end it won't do. Trump cannot tolerate that there would be "the adults in the room" that would water down his effeorts. The idea that "oh well, Trump just blurts these things out to get attention" won't fly.

They clearly did. They wanted something similar, yet they also got a lot with that. Notably Trump and also Musk, which the latter they might not have anticipated.

And do you know that under Orban, Hungarian military has gone into Africa, into Chad specifically, perhaps to act like the Russian Africa Corps (ex-Wagner)? When typical domestic politics is boring, do something exciting!



For Orban reality set limits here. The Hungarian contingent is supposed to be from 200 to 400 strong for two years and is there to help the Chadian military (and perhaps get lucrative deals for Hungary, read Orban). That's as much as the puny Hungarian armed forces can do in another continent. But it tells something about the thinking of these people.

For Trump and Musk, what is the limit? So why not annex Greenland and Panama and talk about expanding the territory of the US? It's not so wild off, isn't it? What possible could go wrong? That Denmark would raise it's military spending to 5% to protect itself from ...whom? Equally with the DOGE, why think about contracts and Congress approved spending, when you can simply stop it on the weekend?

This is why the Republicans by becoming the loyalist MAGA party are pinning everything on Trump and Musk, and just can now observe what they are getting.

Anyone else? Surely there must be an alarm bell ringing somewhere about this? — Wayfarer

As I've stated again and again. Elon Musk will be the most hated man in the US in the future. You see, it will be alright for the South African born billionaire to be hated even by the Trump crowd, as God-Emperor Trump cannot do anything else than his genius blessed acts. But Elon can go. Because this won't end happily, really. The man is bouncing too hard here and there.

Let's start from the basics. Musk owns a very overvalued car manufacture. Somebody now buying a Tesla will make a clear political statement. And that is bad. This is the reason just why corporate leaders usually try stay out of the media limelight. And the demand for Tesla has started to plummet dramatically. As he hasn't at all put on hold his previous business life, the way that classical a business leaders like McNamara did when becoming the Defense minister, giving the fig leaf to being in a government position, he has painted himself a clear target. And what about then SpaceX? How about it now, if SpaceX suddenly wins contracts to build rockets to Mars? Will that bring the country together as the Apollo-missions did? Will that feel like the country getting together and showing what the nation can do or will it be something else. Just ask yourself.

What basically is happening in the US is what happened in Hungary. Basically one should learn what Victor Orban has achieved in Hungary, as that would be the objective of Trump.

Here's the problem. Trump is too much mesmerized with the tariffs. Don't think that he will leave it this, to 30 days and forget about them. Nope, this is just the start and the nasty EU hasn't even been bullied yet. Usually these things work when the response IS NOT things like Canadians booing during the singing US national anthem. And in the end there will be a trade war and this will cause inflation, the "pain" that Trump is now hinting. Now what does this have to do with Elon? Everything. As he will cut things, then when things get bad, they will likely have to give aid to otherwise collapsing industries or financial institutions. So likely the cuts in the larger picture won't happen.

I guess the thinking is to make a shock and awe multifaceted attack immediately on everything and then hope that by the midterms everything will look rosy again. But that's unlikely. Elon is just so intoxicated about power that he's going all over places, even into domestic politics of other countries. That shows a lack of focus and serious breach of respect, which is typical for a billionaire who for example started manufacturing flame throwers because he was bored. But getting entangled in British and German domestic politics? Yes, you will take the center stage in a fancy ball if ogle and grope the wives of others. At first the couples might be just taken back, but soon fists will fly. It is Elon that will be the lightning rod and will take the hits. After all, he isn't part of the administration and Trump won't do anything to help others. That's not Trump.

Interesting what the views would be in a year from now.

It seems to me that their small population is due to the fact that their ancestors were forcefully assimilated into the nation-states of Scandinavia, but I could be wrong. — Arcane Sandwich

You are wrong, at least in my opinion. The history wasn't like that. Believe or not, but Lapland was very much uninhabited and is still quite uninhabited. The population density is similar to Santa Cruz province in Argentina or to Alaska. The Sámi people have basically grown in size and actually the number of people speaking Sámi as mother tongue have increased.

The population of now Finnish Lapland in the year 1500 is estimated having been about 5000 and in 1830 about 20 000. Only in the 18th Century records of people started to be kept in Lapland. And actually the Swedish government banned Finnish migration from the south to Lapland until 1675, yet even then there were already Finns living in Lapland as Lappish people or Laplanders can be also a Finn (or Swede or Norwegian), not only Sámi. One cannot talk about colonization as for example in the Americas. Those that migrated to the area in the 17th Century had to get a permit from the Lappish villages to settle down or the land was bought or rented from then. Another way was through marriage. And the Lappish villages weren't only Sámi. Furthermore, there was no government project of "settling" Lapland, so the idea of similar attrocities as in America isn't a reality.

You say that as if it happened last Monday or something. — Arcane Sandwich

Well, the domestication of the reindeer happen in historic times, in the late Middle Ages. I think it was first the Norwegians that domesticated mountain reindeer. The Sámi adapted to this, but also other Lapplanders too. Usually domestication of wild animals, if you can call that about herds that freely walk around tundra, has happened far more earlier.

The classic picture of a Sámi with a reindeer in the tundra:

It doesn't seem that the issue here is about having white skin, blond hair and blue eyes. — Arcane Sandwich

Well, racist ideologies don't need any logic and there isn't logic. Europeans have been racist towards each other, not only other people.

The Sámi have a culture that has been deemed primitive or inferior in some sense, in relation to the modern nation states of Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc., which is why those countries carried out policies to assimilate them in a cultural sense. — Arcane Sandwich

Yes. Indeed those kind of ideas were popular during the era of nationalism and the classic racism that eugenics promoted. Wildly popular in Sweden. Yet in fact the opposite happened what you think. This made Sámi identity more evident. In 1917 there was held the first congress of the Sami people in Norway because of the actions of the Norwegian government. Similar "national consciousness" didn't rise in Finland then, because there wasn't much if any tensions between Sámi and other Lapplanders. Or there simple wasn't enough activists.

But note the time line here. All that talk of inferior people, the need for assimiliation and eugenics ended quite quickly after WW2. Eugenics and classic nationalism of the 19th Century went away in the Nordic countries quite quickly. Then in the 1960's and 1970's the governments have supported the Sámi culture and language. And why not, when you are talking about 10 000 people of whom 2 000 speak as a mother tongue Sámi language, it isn't a huge amount to sponsor Sámi culture and have a Sámi parliament of Finland. More like a tourist attraction nowdays when you have Europe's "only indigenous people" around.

Finnish president in the Sámi parliament:

Would it be fair to say that Norway and Sweden (and to a lesser extent, Finland) carried out fascist policies against the Sámi people? Maybe there's few native people today in Lapland because those are the ones that weren't forcefully assimilated. — Arcane Sandwich

Fascist? Again an awkward use of the term fascism. It's basically eugenics and racist ideas, not fascism. Sweden or Norway (or Finland) weren't fascist states.

And just what to you would be by "native people"? Compared to whom?

In America it's so different. You do have a divide between native Americans and all others. You have had a class divide by race thanks to the Spaniards, who were so racist that they made the children born in America to Spanish parents who had migrated from Spain, peninsulares, a lower caste, criollos. There's still a divide between the native population and those of basically European origin and it's really different. Some countries it's a bigger problem, some countries a lesser problem.

First of all, with the Sámi, we are talking about really a small group of people. In Finland there's only about 10 000 Sámi. That is a population of a small town. And about the genetics in Finland in general. Archeologists found this ancient village that was one of the earliest human settlements after the last Ice Age in Finland. When they looked at the geneology of the ancient people and compared them to the local people now living there, it was such a perfect match that they could say with high probability that likely the current folk living in the area were descendants of these ancient dwellers. Another example, which is actually quite common, I remember my parents summer cottage in Middle Finland had a farm as a neighbor. The farm had been owned by one family since the time Columbus found America. Unfortunately the Church books went only so far (to the late 15th Century), so likely the family could have been there for longer time.

Hence the idea of one group being indigenous and another not is a bit confusing, when basically these migrations happened thousands of years ago. Sámi became reindeer herders only in the Middle Ages.

But yes, the Sámi activists have to adapt to the dominant narrative of the indigenous/native people being the victims of the "white colonizers", because that's the only narrative which people use about these issues. Hence you end up with totally white Europeans calling other white Europeans "whities" and having to claim they aren't so white. Bit awkward when you have pale skin, blue eyes and blond hair.

For 30 days. Time for companies to start looking at ways to evade tariffs, if they hadn't thought that Trump is serious...

And US steel producers ready to higher prices to match the price of imported steel. Yes, that's the way!!!

and look how that has turned out. — NOS4A2

Yeah. Peace with Israel has continued without Islamists taking over. So?

Or you think it would be better to have Egypt as a failed state too, something equivalent of Syria? Btw, I think Egypt is one country that was off the aid cutting bloc (if I remember correctly).

Sure, I'm not a fan of the institutionalised aid given by rich countries to poor ones. There's a lot of negative aspects. Starting from the fact that aid doesn't usual give the growth. But all of it? Not all has been a just lost cause. Things like famines have become far more rare in Africa.

Africa is the last place that has large famines. Ok if those become larger?



How about Central and South America? And of course one might ask, you think the security of the US or Canada (that's where you live) is going to better with more nations going into such a dire state as Haiti?

He sure did. — NOS4A2

What role does Canada play in the U.S. fentanyl supply?

Almost none. In its fact sheet, the Trump administration says Canada has a "growing footprint" in narcotics distribution with Mexican cartels active in the country. But law enforcement and drug policy experts agree that Canada plays a minimal role in fentanyl smuggling into the U.S.

(See here)

Seems more of an excuse, because Canada likely isn't cheating in trade as China. Hope the Canada, Mexico and the EU make a coordinated stance against Trump's trade war. But in the end, it's the Americans themselves that have to pay the price.

It's going to be as chaotic like this. This is 100% Trump. Simply US soft power and role is going to demolish. How on Earth will they (DOGE) look over thousands of projects and decide what is OK and what is not? As I've stated, Elon Musk will be the most hated person after a year of this as likely even Trump loyalists will vent their anger at him.

Imagine the predicament of those staffers, many of whom have dedicated their lives to the welfare of their recipient states and nations, who's entire careers are now being ended under the MAGA jackboots. — Wayfarer

Imagine the actual consequences in Africa and the Middle East. So you stop vaccination programs in Afrinca? Ok. Any thought about the consequences on that? So you basically stop the education department in Jordan? Ok. If people don't know, the US supports directly the Jordanian government:

The new MOU is subdivided into four baskets of funds, including $610 million in Economic
Support Funds (ESF) for direct U.S. budget support for the Jordanian government—the most of any country worldwide; $400 million in Foreign Military Funds (FMF) for Jordanian Armed
Forces to procure U.S. equipment; $350 million in ESF for USAID programming; and $75
million in “incentive” ESF to support Jordanian economic and public sector reforms.

Next in line is the chaos at the FBI, which will be emasculated.

And for this trade war, that likely will result in a global recession, is as bonkers as US taking Panama or Greenland.

A rational response for Mexico, Canada and the EU would to gang up on the US, try to compensate for the loss of US trade with encouraging trade between themselves.

Even if the trade war and domestic chaos will engulf the Trump administrations time and Trump will just move on from the Greenland annexation dreams (hopefully), the rift has already happened. European politicians have to take seriously Trump's comments about Greenland. What it does to the alliance, when the US wants to annex territory from a very loyal ally that already gives the US free usage and bases in Greenland is really something nobody wants to discuss. But the first thing is obvious: do not rely on the US. Hence if Europe really will spend more on defense, it will do it focusing on creating it's own military industrial complex like France.

The French model can prevail:


I think it's worse for Panama. There Trump really could at least take control of the Panama Canal Zone. I'm thinking starting a thread about it.

A bit off the topic, but Swedes had similar policies. I think we Finns didn't, because we were looked down upon as Mongols by the Swedish racists of the 19th and early 20th Century. But that's history... a lot changed in Europe after the demise of the Third Reich, as you know.

What is hilarious in the present discourse only accepts the American juxtaposition of natives against white "colonial" thinking in how that doesn't fit to the Sámi. The Sámi look exactly like Finns, you wouldn't at all in any way differ them from Finns. The Sámi have their large share of blue eyed and blonds so it ridiculous for them to have to talk about Finns "whites". And the "clash" between the Finns and the Sámi happened I guess in Antiquity when there simply was no Finnish country (as Finnish tribes fought each other until the Middle Ages), so the idea of native people/colonizers is funny in the case of Lapland. And the Sami as actually so few here, far less than people in Greenland.

I think that we are talking about autocracy and totalitarianism rather than just fascism. Totalitarianism would be more useful than the just fascism. Yet since obviously the US on the way to socialism, not at least yet (let's see what the counterforce is to the Trump presidency), the oligarchs in the government along Trump's family will have now the power.

Are you expecting me to defend Maduro? I'm not quite getting what it is that you expect from me. — Arcane Sandwich

Lol. Nope, hopefully not. And those smart lefties here on this forum won't defend the Soviet Union or Marxism-Leninism either. They might be not as hostile and will note some positive aspects, but in general they do use their brains and don't just loyally support something religiously.

So there's no such thing as left-wing populism, in your view? It's always right-wing populism? — Arcane Sandwich

Oh no! On the contrary. Read some Lenin and you can see the populist elements in bolshevism and in Marxism-Leninism. Imperial Russia wasn't obviously a democracy, but right from the start democracy wasn't something that the leftist revolutionaries had in mind. After all, the dictatorship of the Proletariat isn't in any way "democratic" with it's class enemies and violent revolution against the capitalists.

Or are you saying that both left-wing and right-wing populisms lead to fascism? — Arcane Sandwich

Yes, it can lead. Best example of left-wing populism is Venezuela. Would that be a fascist state? Democracy isn't working there. But hey! Maduro is happily taking back Venezuelan illegals from the US and Venezuelan oil isn't under the Trump tariffs (yet).

The second development is Trump's demands for a list of all the FBI agents that worked on the Jan 6th insurrection and stolen documents cases. It seems many hundreds or even thousands of individuals could be fired or demoted for doing their jobs, following the exoneration pardoning of hundreds of insurrectionist police-bashers. — Wayfarer

Kash Patel in his confirmation hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee naturally had no idea of the insurrectionist that had pleaded guilty and now were pardoned. And simply wouldn't reply on who he will be going after. But if he gets to be the FBI director, nobody will be as loyal and a willing bulldog for Trump. Until when Trump is disappointed at him when he cannot give everything Trump wants.

Indeed. The fascist appeals to the irrational sentiments of his followers. He riles them up with vitriolic rhetoric about some other group of people who, for some reason, must take the blame for every key societal problem. — Arcane Sandwich

And here's why populism leads to fascism: by emphasizing the divide between the rulers and the "ordinary people" and stating that key societal problems are because of the rulers, populism can easily descend into fascism as populism embraces strong leaders, wants to take the power away form the real or many times imagined "elite" and replace it with the movements followers, who will follow their leader. Above all, fascism opposes democracy and democratic system where decisions have to be negotiated with other political factions. It sees democracy as the reason for corruption. Also this leads to a command economy, because the leader has to be in charge of everything.

Hell with all USAID? Well good that a 45 million program out of 42,5 billion was found out, but I guess all of them can go when you can cheer for 0,001% waste in Burma. At least the 100 countries or so that do have USAID projects ought to learn how untrustworthy the US is. Countries like Jordan will find it now the hard way on what it means to be dependent on the US as an "ally". But that's just positive to Trump, perhaps he can now pressure Jordan more for assist in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians out of Gaza. Nevermind that Jordan has been one key ally in the Middle East and has US bases and for example took 1 million refugees from Syria. Or the other border for Israel that has been peaceful.

But anyway, Trump trade wars are starting, so good luck with the effects of those. Could we later then talk of Trump layoffs in US factories that have been dependent on the integrated commerce between the US and Canada and Mexico? How this wouldn't end up in inflation, I don't know.

And firing of 15 inspector generals? Inspector general ought to be really independent, but once it's the Trump administration, there's the possibility of them not being so independent. Adam Schiff remarked on this too:

Schiff pushed back on that notion, warning that “if we don’t have good and independent inspector generals, we are going to see a swamp refill.”

He added, “It may be the president’s goal here ... to remove anyone that’s going to call the public attention to his malfeasance.”

Only if it's a realistic possibility, which it isn't. The US and Europe are and never were going to risk WW3 over Ukraine. — Tzeentch

What do you know, nuclear deterrence works.

Supplying arms to one side isn't going to war. Never has been. And that supplying arms has been the issue. For the 582 pages, if you have not noticed.

:100: :up:

With the realism you argue for, Finland never would have made it against the Soviet Union. We would have suffered the part like the Baltic States, that accepted "diplomacy". And luckily the Ukrainians have understood to defend their country and not surrender, which some "realists" have long argued for.

Actual realism is that Putin will accept a negotiated peace/ceasefire if he faces a real possibility of military defeat. Nothing else.