• Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    , they didn't. They were pseudo-subsumed into Putin's Russia.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    “Nyet means Nyet. Russia’s NATO enlargement Red Lines”.NOS4A2

    Ukraine also has red lines known as borders; most sovereign nations do.

    Trump's relationships are transactional. What's he getting out of it? I think part of the answer is that he's clearing his desk in order to attend to China and another part is that he's trying to peel Russia away from China. Ideally, he would like Putin as an ally, but making him neutral would help too. It's quite likely that he sees Putin as a better ally than Europe.Ludwig V

    I guess he should transact away, though there's more to politics.
    Backstabbing long-standing allies then means no more trust.
    If he ditches NATO, moves all focus to China and there's an uptick in related activities, then he shouldn't be surprised if he's alone in case "Little green men" start appearing in Alaska or whatever.
    Economics, trade, US$ dependencies, whatever, seems to be moving off, which I'm sure he'll find someone else to blame for, and his flock will believe him.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    Trump has just banned all protest on college campuses, on price of jail.Punshhh

    I couldn't find that anywhere. Do you have a reference? (Not that it'd be surprising.)

    I’ve just heard an interview with general Sir Richard Sherriff (ex chief of the European arm of NATO). Who has his finger on the pulse. That the Russian army is in a bad way. They are putting disabled people and teenagers onto the from line and using civilian vans and vehicles, even golf trolleys to supply them and morale is low.Punshhh

    So, this is a good time for Putin to be relieved of pressure. Trump, at least, seems to be accommodating him.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    Allegedly ChatGPT regarding the Oval Office crap on Feb 28, 2025:

    1. Blaming the victim for their own situation

    Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering. The implication is that Ukraine itself is responsible for being occupied by Russia and for the deaths of its people.

    2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’

    Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights.

    3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’

    Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender.

    4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war

    Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’

    5. Devaluing the victims of war

    “If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to regroup and strike again.

    6. Dominance tactics

    Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” and “You’re not in a position to dictate to us.” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate.

    7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’

    Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged.

    8. Projection and distortion of reality

    Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky.

    9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US

    Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion.

    10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance

    Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.
  • European or Global Crisis?
    I suppose, by the defeatist argument, South Korea has already lost to North Korea?
    "Surrender now or nukes will level Seoul and other places."
    (Kim Jong Un to generals: "Gather 1,000 children in Pyongyang and broadcast them playing.")

    What concessions will Putin be asked to make?
    So far, all the “peace talks” have been about what Ukraine must give up—territory, NATO aspirations, sovereignty. So what exactly is Putin offering?
    Is he withdrawing his troops? Paying reparations? Acknowledging war crimes? Or is his big “compromise” just taking less of Ukraine than he originally wanted?
    — Talgat Azimov
    If a guy steals your house and offers to return half of your living room, that’s not a “compromise”—that’s a hostage deal.
    When one side just wants a “pause” to reload, that’s not diplomacy—that’s preparation for the next invasion.
    A peace deal where only one side makes sacrifices isn’t peace—it’s surrender with better branding.
    — Talgat Azimov
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    First I've heard of the (alleged) Patrushev comment:

    March 2, 2025 (Sunday)

    On February 28, the same day that President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance took the side of Russian president Vladimir Putin against Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office, Martin Matishak of The Record, a cybersecurity news publication, broke the story that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered U.S. Cyber Command to stop all planning against Russia, including offensive digital actions.

    Both the scope of the directive and its duration are unclear.

    On Face the Nation this morning, Representative Mike Turner (R-OH), a strong supporter of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and Ukraine, contradicted that information. “Considering what I know, what Russia is currently doing against the United States, that would I’m certain not be an accurate statement of the current status of the United States operations,” he said. Well respected on both sides of the aisle, Turner was in line to be the chair of the House Intelligence Committee in this Congress until House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) removed him from that slot and from the intelligence committee altogether.

    And yet, as Stephanie Kirchgaessner of The Guardian notes, the Trump administration has made clear that it no longer sees Russia as a cybersecurity threat. Last week, at a United Nations working group on cybersecurity, representatives from the European Union and the United Kingdom highlighted threats from Russia, while Liesyl Franz, the State Department’s deputy assistant secretary for international cybersecurity, did not mention Russia, saying the U.S. was concerned about threats from China and Iran.

    Kirchgaessner also noted that under Trump, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which monitors cyberthreats against critical infrastructure, has set new priorities. Although Russian threats, especially those against U.S. election systems, were a top priority for the agency in the past, a source told Kirchgaessner that analysts were told not to follow or report on Russian threats.

    “Russia and China are our biggest adversaries,” the source told Kirchgaessner. “With all the cuts being made to different agencies, a lot of cybersecurity personnel have been fired. Our systems are not going to be protected and our adversaries know this.” “People are saying Russia is winning,” the source said. “Putin is on the inside now.”

    Another source noted that “There are dozens of discrete Russia state-sponsored hacker teams dedicated to either producing damage to US government, infrastructure and commercial interests or conducting information theft with a key goal of maintaining persistent access to computer systems.” “Russia is at least on par with China as the most significant cyber threat, the person added. Under those circumstances, the source said, ceasing to follow and report Russian threats is “truly shocking.”

    Trump’s outburst in the Oval Office on Friday confirmed that Putin has been his partner in politics since at least 2016. “Putin went through a hell of a lot with me,” Trump said. “He went through a phony witch hunt where they used him and Russia… Russia, Russia, Russia—you ever hear of that deal?—that was a phony Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, scam. Hillary Clinton, shifty Adam Schiff, it was a Democrat scam. And he had to go through that. And he did go through it, and we didn’t end up in a war. And he went through it. He was accused of all that stuff. He had nothing to do with it. It came out of Hunter Biden’s bathroom.”

    Putin went through a hell of a lot with Trump? It was an odd statement from a U.S. president, whose loyalty is supposed to be dedicated to the Constitution and the American people.

    Trump has made dismissing as a hoax what he calls “Russia, Russia, Russia” central to his political narrative. But Russian operatives did, in fact, work to elect him in 2016. A 2020 report from the Republican-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee confirmed that Putin ordered hacks of Democratic computer networks, and at two crucial moments WikiLeaks, which the Senate committee concluded was allied with the Russians, dumped illegally obtained emails that were intended to hurt the candidacy of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. Trump openly called for Russia to hack Clinton’s emails.

    Russian operatives also flooded social media with disinformation, not necessarily explicitly endorsing Trump, but spreading lies about Clinton to depress Democratic turnout, or to rile up those on the right by falsely claiming that Democrats intended to ban the Pledge of Allegiance, for example. The goal of the propaganda was not simply to elect Trump. It was to pit the far ends of the political spectrum against the middle, tearing the nation apart.

    Fake accounts on Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook drove wedges between Americans over issues of race, immigration, and gun rights. Craig Timberg and Tony Romm of the Washington Post reported in 2018 that Facebook officials told Congress that the Russian campaign reached 126 million people on Facebook and 20 million on Instagram.

    That effort was not a one-shot deal: Russians worked to influence the 2020 presidential election, too. In 2021 the Office of the Director of National Intelligence concluded that Putin “authorized, and a range of Russian government organizations conducted, influence operations aimed at denigrating President [Joe] Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting former President Trump, undermining public confidence in the electoral process, and exacerbating sociopolitical division in the US.” But “(u)nlike in 2016,” the report said, “we did not see persistent Russian cyber efforts to gain access to election infrastructure.”

    Moscow used “proxies linked to Russian intelligence to push influence narratives—including misleading or unsubstantiated allegations against President Biden—to US media organizations, US officials, and prominent US individuals, including some close to former President Trump and his administration,” the Office of the Director of National Intelligence concluded.

    In October 2024, Matthew Olsen, head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, warned in an interview with CBS News that Russia was bombarding voters with propaganda to divide Americans before that year’s election, as well. Operatives were not just posting fake stories and replying to posts, but were also using AI to manufacture fake videos and laundering Russian talking points through social media influencers. Just a month before, news had broken that Russia was funding Tenet Media, a company that hired right-wing personalities Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, Lauren Southern, Tayler Hansen, and Matt Christiansen, who repeated Russian talking points.

    Now back in office, Trump and MAGA loyalists say that efforts to stop disinformation undermine their right to free speech. Project 2025, the extremist blueprint for the second Trump administration, denied that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election—calling it “a Clinton campaign dirty trick”—and called for ending government efforts to stop disinformation with “utmost urgency.” “The federal government cannot be the arbiter of truth,” it said.

    On February 20, Steven Lee Myers, Julian E. Barnes, and Sheera Frenkel of the New York Times reported that the Trump administration is firing or reassigning officials at the FBI and CISA who had worked on protecting elections. That includes those trying to stop foreign propaganda and disinformation and those combating cyberattacks and attempts to disrupt voting systems.

    Independent journalist Marisa Kabas broke the story that two members of the “Department of Government Efficiency” are now installed at CISA: Edward Coristine, a 19-year-old known as “Big Balls,” and Kyle Schutt, a 38-year-old software engineer. Kim Zetter of Wired reported that since 2018, CISA has “helped state and local election offices around the country assess vulnerabilities in their networks and help secure them.”

    During the 2024 campaign, Trump said repeatedly that he would end the war in Ukraine. Shortly after the election, a newspaper reporter asked Nikolai Patrushev, who is close to Putin, if Trump’s election would mean “positive changes from Russia’s point of view.” Patrushev answered: “To achieve success in the elections, Donald Trump relied on certain forces to which he has corresponding obligations. And as a responsible person, he will be obliged to fulfill them.

    Today, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told a reporter: “The new administration is rapidly changing all foreign policy configurations. This largely aligns with our vision.
    Heather Cox Richardson

    If true, then treason.
  • European or Global Crisis?
    , Anne Frank had "peace" :/ Freddie Knoller got peace ... Putin needs determined deterrence. Can be done without Trump, but not with defeatism and believing whatever comes out of the Kremlin without further ado. Do you think Zelenskyy should return home to the Ukrainians and the Rada with "Trump's peace"?
  • European or Global Crisis?
    , "Trump's peace" is "Putin's peace", as it turns out.

    Putin would walk away scot-free with no concessions, no change except no further resistance, incidentally also free to continue their modus operandi against the rest of Ukraine (like proxy or similar, somewhat deniable, Russification campaigns). Almost like invisible/absent in any peace talks or deals, though a great victory in the eyes of his domestic peers; might otherwise have turned out bad for him at home.

    Trump would walk away with rights to Ukrainian resources/minerals/metals (good for Musk, incidentally). Much like Putin would be free to drain resources/minerals/metals in Donbas (plus, free of pressure, redirect efforts). Trump would have, though belatedly, ended the war he said he'd end in a day if elected.

    The Ukrainians would get American workers on the ground, concessions to the Kremlin, and US$s. No (other) security guarantees though? Evidently, the US + Russia + the UK + France (+ China) couldn't provide such guarantees before, which Putin has violated since 2014; NATO plausibly could. As an aside, what could they do if some "American workers" turned out to have, let's say, ulterior motives?

    I wouldn't call the deal a work of art (pun intended), especially not for the Ukrainians, and it's about them. It's fairly easy to come up with hypothetical analogies for your (whoever's) home soil, try it.

    Well, maybe it's time for democracy to concede or give way to aggressive-regressive authoritarianism?
  • European or Global Crisis?
    , I don't think Trump cares so much about peace, as he cares that he said he'd end the war in 24 hours if voted in.
    Since that failed a month in, he needed someone to blame, anyone, and had one plan for that someone to be Zelenskyy.
    No hint of admission of failure, certainly no apologizing to his voters, nothing, but instead blame the victim in the war, by any means possible that his voters might buy (just watch them amplifying it all over the place).
    Trump and Vance displayed vulgar arrogance in front of everyone (some roots in Kremlin (and Netanyahu) lines). They more or less assaulted someone alone and surrounded on their turf; well, Rubio seemed to wish he was somewhere else. Circus. AP banned, Russian state media present.
    It's been clear for some time that Trump's word is worthless, even though they all have to be considered carefully.
    Zelenskyy is accountable to the Ukrainians and the Rada — not to Trump — and has other allies that don't ramble or turn so easily, and don't have an affinity for Putin.
    Trump apparently chose to play Putin's game, which would make his voters extensions of the Kremlin. Well played, Putin.

    They respect me. Let me tell you, Putin went through a hell of a lot with me. He went through a phony witch hunt where they used him and Russia, Russia, Russia.Trump

    What an embarrassment.
  • European or Global Crisis?
    I think Trump will organize a yalta-like moment where he sits down with Putin and maybe XI and/or Modi too, [...]ChatteringMonkey

    Do you think he'll continue to have enough domestic support?
    At the moment, it seems to be going down among the general population and officials.
    When asked, some of Trump's voters wanted a cultural revolution in the US, "anti-woke", against homosexual marriage, etc, not an alliance with Putin.
    Some fans don't care much either way about much of anything, but just want Trump; I'm guessing they're a (small) minority.

    Maybe there's also a question of what Vance might do, and/or Johnson/others.

    Quite a difference:

    Jan 6, 2021 - Capitol Building in Washington DC - against election
    74pvhtjkuobsee2n.jpg

    Mar 1, 2025 - Times Square in New York - for Ukraine
    kx3swmyp82u6qdjm.jpg
  • What should the EU do when Trump wins the next election?
    , Europe comes in snack-sized bites, though, as far as Putin is concerned.
    Mounting an effective counter is challenging.
  • What should the EU do when Trump wins the next election?
    Trump and Vance's assault on Zelenskyy is roughly copied from Lavrov's stated sentiment towards Ukraine in 2024. The alignment seems clear enough anyway. Trump and Vance were "speaking Kremlin", well, I guess that part was clear enough.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Only 15.7% of Americans make that much. 57% of Americans make that or less.frank

    And now there seems to be a lot more without a job, thanks to you-know-who.

    I suppose some might be replaced with AI systems, too.

    Then there are tariff wars, raising prices further, thanks to you-know-who.

    EDIT: that rhymed :D
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    The first ever Roman fire brigade was created by Marcus Licinius Crassus. Fires were almost a daily occurrence in Rome, and Crassus took advantage of the fact that Rome had no fire department, by creating his own brigade—500 men strong—which rushed to burning buildings at the first cry of alarm. Upon arriving at the scene, however, the firefighters did nothing while Crassus offered to buy the burning building from the distressed property owner, at a miserable price. If the owner agreed to sell the property, his men would put out the fire; if the owner refused, then they would simply let the structure burn to the ground. After buying many properties this way, he rebuilt them, and often leased the properties to their original owners or new tenants.Firefighting (Wikipedia)

    » crass
  • European or Global Crisis?
    , they felt threatened by any loss of control over Ukraine, sovereign nations be damned. You can go over the evidence yourself. Since then, two new NATO members, Europe on a rearmament path, ...
  • European or Global Crisis?
    What it needed was to not have a US-vasal state on its border. So open up diplomacy with Russia, agree to neutrality of Ukraine and end the war. If the US leaves Europe as it plans to do, a lot of the tension will go away... Russia felt threathend by the US, not that much by Europe itself.ChatteringMonkey

    (Feb 19, 2025) The Kremlin feels threatened by loss of control over Ukraine. NATO talk gave them their excuse.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    Ukraine voted for a comedian and they got a president, America voted for a president and got a comedian (a dangerous clown) — Dave Cap
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    , Australia hasn't had tariffs on US imports for a couple of decades. Transparent rhetoric.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Then back to Trump being Trump, as usual...

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XkgoXUyGlHM
    ssu

    I find it puzzling how many still take Trump's word for much of anything.
    Not only believe him but parrot what he says argumentatively.
    Weird.

    The US and Australia signed a free trade agreement in 2005. Australian officials are now negotiating tariffs that Trump wants to impose on them.
    The US-Mexico-Canada Agreement was signed by Trump in 2018.
    If the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act came to Trump's mind, then something's off, otherwise he's just ignorant.
  • The Musk Plutocracy
    :D Poor thing got aborted. (title is easy to misread)

    Grok briefly censored criticism of Musk and Trump. It was blamed on a new hire who hadn't 'fully absorbed' the startup's culture.
    — Effie Webb · Business Insider · Feb 24, 2025

    I suppose, with their track records (here's Trump's) it shouldn't come as a surprise.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Hmm Well, diversification seems attractive these days. (Hence posting in this thread.)

    If Canada Wants a Plan B for Trade, Europe Could Be the Answer
    — Arthur Dennyson Hamdani · The Walrus · Feb 25, 2025

    There's been some chatter about defense as well.

    France convenes second meeting on Ukraine with other Europeans, Canada
    — John Irish, Michel Rose, GV De Clercq · Reuters · Feb 18, 2025
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    , I was just going to suggest that ask the folks in the three Baltic states, the Swedes, Finns, Poles, Ukrainians, ... It's been covered in other threads, though.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    US, Ukraine agree to terms of critical minerals dealNOS4A2

    Now they just have to find a way to get their hands on that good stuff in Donbas.

    Extortion (and on Putin's wishlist):

    Exclusive: US could cut Ukraine's access to Starlink internet services over minerals, say sources
    — Andrea Shalal, Joey Roulette, Marisa Taylor, Idrees Ali, Don Durfee, Dave Gregorio, Emelia Sithole-Matarise, Daniel Wallis · Reuters · Feb 22, 2025
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    FYI, here's a chat I had with someone fairly intelligent ("AA"), that I know. I sent them roughly this message (Feb 15, 2025) (names and such removed/replaced):

    AA: you missed everything. And the CIA missed the GOP candidate in Butler PA.
    AA: The main goal is to destroy the Deep State. There's going to be a lot of collateral damage.
    me: Like the state? :smile:
    me: Canada, Greenland, ..., don't want to be enrolled in the US, by the way. Is the alienation part of destroying "the Deep State"? // You know that Xi and Putin are having a field day, yes?
    AA: Yes. One of the main promises was Schedule F, which would destroy many bureaucracies. These agencies over time have suffered capture by the CIA and DNC. They both do good and bad, are slush funds for unapproved spending, fund NGOs which then catalyze coups. // It's time to destroy the state as we know it. A lot of guilty and innocent people will be destroyed in the process.
    me: "he would see this country burn if he could be king of the ashes" // — Varys · https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2178798/characters/nm0384152 // "an evil man will burn his own nation to the ground to rule over the ashes" // — someone · https://www.truthorfiction.com/sun-tzu-rule-over-ashes-quote/
    me: so what does Canada / Greenland have to do with any of that?
    AA: It's not the 'nation' that's being burned. It's the Deep State. Trump is extremely pro-nation, a libertarian nationalist. He's anti-other-nations, anti-couping other nations, and old school populist/industrialist/working-man-jobist. // Canada and Greenland are strategic.
    me: Whuzzat mean? Concretely, I mean. // (Then there's Panama, Mexico, Mar-a-Gaza.)
    AA: Canada being a state aids in the oncoming multi-polar world. Both countries would be stronger and more prosperous for it. // Greenland will provide future shipping route, minerals, and a stronger northern position which China and Russia would we weaker due to. // Panama and Mexico are obvious. // Gaza is weird. It's a failed defeated state. The US would have an economic and geopolitical foothold there by rebuilding it along with other Arab nations. The main goal being to unify that area making Iran an uninvited party.
    me: so, annexation?
    AA: territories, states...
    me: Canada and Greenland become parts of the US? // (Or should I read your comments differently)?
    AA: Yes. If the argument can be made.
    me: You don't see any problem here?
    AA: No. I'm a fan of the Monopoly on Violence....because hostile states among us believe in it.
    me: what if you're wrong?
    AA: Those that execute the monopoly on violence find themselves in a state of being wrong, when they over use that argument and other with that same right execute it against them. // At that time a state can as, if losing in a conflict where and when they would have done something differently. // ...keeping in mind the idea of "wrong" and "right" are strategic rather than moral.
    me: what if you're wrong on whatever rationale/assumptions? // A country turning on itself is the supreme victory of adversaries.
    AA: That's what's happening right now in the USA. The USA has been terribly violent (regime change, coups, wars) since WWII. It's people are reassessing how the next 50 years looks and it's more isolationist. So securing the region according to the Munroe Doctrine and preparing for multipolarity is the better pathway.
    me: I meant what if your rationale/assumptions are off? (you've expressed a few here)
    AA: As in "mistakes". It's game theoretical.
    me: well, mistakes with inter/national consequences. (Have you run simulations or something?)
    AA: Making mistakes, not taking risks, .... all of it has consequences. // Of course not. But we may be entering an age wherein AI is making the tough decisions.
    me: What consequences are you seeing? // Say, what if you're off about CIA in general or specifically (above)?
    AA: _ is censoring my discussing this.

    What do you make of it?
    (Though tempting, I haven't brought up any psychological terms.)
  • The Musk Plutocracy
    Conflict of interest?

    Musk/DOGE recommended firing federal workers at

    ▸ FDA, which oversees Neuralink
    ▸ FAA, which oversees SpaceX
    ▸ USAID, which probed Starlink
    ▸ CFPB, which oversees Tesla's financing arm and a potential payment platform on twitter/X
  • Ukraine Crisis
    I'll just note (again), that Europe isn't some monolithic entity.
    The EU is part of Europe, Norway (mature democracy), Hungary (mostly democratic), ..., are parts of thereof.
    Hungary argues with whoever else, Croatia and Serbia are arguing, Slovakia might argue with Germany and France, the UK now hangs out on the side, ... Then there are all kinds of bureaucracy.
    Unlike the US, the EU isn't a country, Europe isn't a country, and has a tediously long history.
    If one expects Europe to have centralized executive powers (like the US), then they have things to learn.
    This sort of "diversity" is exploitable, which is what the Kremlin does.

    A question:
    Is there an underlying assumption by some, that the US has a secretive organization (or the like), that more or less determines policy, across the various administrations?
    If not determines, then otherwise assert strong power to their end behind the scenes?
    Say, over the last three decades? Four? More?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Let me just put on a tinfoil hat for a moment.

    The US Vice President, J D Vance, is a fan of Curtis Yarvin, who is anti-democracy, and coined "RAGE" (Retire All Government Employees), Dark Enlightenment, and all that. This coincides somewhat with Trump's Schedule F, and some of Musk/DOGE's heavy-handed activities. Vance is 2nd in line for the US Presidency.

    The US Speaker, Mike Johnson, is a young Earth creationist, holding that the Earth is about 6000 years old (actually the universe is about that age, too). The private/quiet Johnson can be described as a Christian nationalist, and has been working on a number of related projects. It's the Bible first (his reading thereof), plus whatever fringe, but he's not stupid. In most democracies, he wouldn't have much chance of such a high political position. Johnson is 3rd in line for the US Presidency.

    Maybe the Secret Service should take extra care to keep Trump safe?

    OK, tossing the tinfoil hat now. All better.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    , FYI, I updated an old post (Feb 15, 2025); the dictator (illegitimate president) thing originates at the Kremlin.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    Clever. :)

    Zelenskyy says he would step down if Ukraine can join NATO, blasts Trump mineral pitch
    — Cybele Mayes-Osterman · USA TODAY · Feb 23, 2025
  • Ukraine Crisis
    Hill spoke at the Helsinki Commission 22 days before the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine:

    Why Putin Invaded Ukraine: A Crisis Manufactured to Rewrite the Global Order | Fiona Hill on 2/2/22
    — Helsinki Commission · Nov 13, 2024 · 13m:23s


    Hilton interviewed Hill in 2023:

    Why Trump befriended Putin | The life and philosophy of Fiona Hill
    — The Institute of Art and Ideas · Oct 19, 2023 · 11m:13s
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    LIVE on the Senate Floor
    — Senator Bernie Sanders · Feb 20, 2025 · 21m:40s



    Sanders is the real deal, genuine. And he's fine with me disagreeing with whatever policy he'd like.

    A couple of thousand years ago, the first Roman emperor, Augustus, started turning the Republic into an empire. He told Romans he was the only one who could save Rome, and they believed him; he kicked off an imperial cult. A couple hundred years later, under Commodus, the Pax Romana ended, and the Republic had become an autocracy at the whims of the emperor.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    , if cooperating sufficiently, Europe can deal with Putin (keeping it out of NATO offices), including in Ukraine.

    Except:

    Europe can easily get it's conventional gear to defend itself, but what is lacking is the nuclear balancessu

    There's also a matter of US intelligence.

    Either way, European cooperation, sooner rather than later, seems the way to go.
  • European or Global Crisis?
    So has Vance.... It's easy to say no when your self-interest is not at stake.Vera Mont

    :up: Poilievre is susceptible enough
  • European or Global Crisis?
    , in campaigning and otherwise, Poilievre is too much into loud political mudslinging at others, and seeking applause.
    Like a primary modus operandi of dragging others/opponents down with it ("beating them with experience"); not exactly a role model, and he's seemingly not going that way.
    I'm not getting an impression of bona fides concern, trustworthiness, strength/ability to stand up to others, including foreign.
    The politics, which should be the topic I suppose, are the usual these days, some go "left", some go "right", ..., shopping at the political supermarket.
    Maybe "nuisance" wasn't the right word, apologies for that.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    hah I thought this was a joke, but apparently not :D

    ‘LONG LIVE THE KING’: Trump increasingly embraces monarchical imagery
    — Danny Nguyen · POLITICO · Feb 19, 2025

    "CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD. Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED. LONG LIVE THE KING!" –President Donald J. Trump (— The White House · twitter/x · Feb 19, 2025)

    Think he'll declare himself Jesus returned, too?
  • What should the EU do when Trump wins the next election?
    Not a chancefrank

    I'm Jutlandian and have lived in Canuckia for a couple of decades.
    I can tell you with some confidence that Trump has, in my experience, insignificant support.
    Granted, that's not so much about the US in general, it's about Trump, applying as he's doing his thing.
    Lists of what you might not want to buy have been distributed, which isn't something I've seen before.
    Chance? Yep. Redirecting to Europe has already been discussed. But we'll see.

    Trump calls Canada “serious contender” to become 51st US state (— Global News · Feb 13, 2025 · 1m:40s)

    In general, the Canucks have been growing tired of the noise and crap for some time.

    e9znrru022h5x7k0.png
  • European or Global Crisis?
    , even though he's a nuisance, hasn't Poilievre expressed a "No" to Trump?
  • European or Global Crisis?
    So do I. But they also have to take a broader view and team up with pro-democratic factions in Asia, Africa and South America.Vera Mont

    And North America (Canada). ;)

    I'm guessing things would have to keep up pace with Trumpistan, though, at least in some respects.