I simply cannot take you seriously if you consider the Ukraine conflict and Israel-Palestine conflict in the same moral ballpark.

I don't even believe that you sincerely believe that yourself. — Tzeentch

Why wouldn't you put them into the same ballpark?

The only difference is that Palestine and the Palestinians aren't a sovereign state that is attacked by another sovereign state, as in the case of Ukraine. That simply makes a huge deal, because once sovereign states can be done away with, that changes quite a lot in the World.

If you understand so well the reasonable objective of Putin's Russia, then you can well understand "the reasonable objectives" of Netanyahu's administration.

The Ukraine conflict is not comparable to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Ukraine is much more morally grey. — Tzeentch

It's not. Above all, Russia is an existential threat under Putin's attempt on an imperial Reconquista. A Russia under someone else would have made things totally different. But now Putin will continue his aggressive policies, they simply won't end with Ukraine. He will go after NATO countries, this is for sure.

For the majority of Europeans, thankfully this a black and white issue and only those falling to Russian propaganda will see it as grey.

The story here is that Europe will now re-arm. This will take a decade or more. In the meantime Russia is weak and can be held at bay for that decade.
The fly in the ointment is the possibility that Trump will gift Ukraine to Putin. This will embolden Putin allowing him to replenish his army and threaten Europe before it re-arms and will have a destabilising effect on geopolitics. — Punshhh

Yes, I agree with you.

What now is likely will happen is that Ukraine simply won't accept the Trump's pro-Russian plan, and Trump will have a temper tantrum on Ukraine ...and Europe. And Europe really has now to aid Ukraine. Let's hope they finally start with the billions of Putin's seized money. Then forget the spending limits and simply use debt to spend more on defense.

Here's what the Americans like JD Vance don't understand. Questions like wokeness or what is considered hate-speech, all this cultural war debate, are issues to be debated inside every democracy and their Parliaments and in their political arena. Threats to the existence of Sovereing states are totally different. And talking about taking the territory of another Sovereign nation state is an opening of Pandora's box. In Europe, we take it deadly serious. And the emphasis is on deadly. It's not about our economical benefits or political or moral character, it is the threat of war and our existence. Political debate or economic benefits or trade issues aren't so important. They don't mean anything compared to our security, which isn't just a few terrorists succeeding in their actions.

Trump seems to be incapable of understanding just how much damage he has done.

Stupid or not, the risk of a spiralling political polarization inside democracies can end up in the political protracted paralysis of necessary reforms to effectively addressing growing internal or external challenges. — neomac

Indeed it can. Polarization makes it difficult even to approach the other side in order to make any agreements. As one observer noted from the Parliament of the Weimar republic when he saw that the coffee tables in the cafeteria were marked by parties, you cannot have a democracy. If members of opposing parties cannot have a coffee together, democracy won't work!

In other words, democracy + appeal to universal human rights + free speech + critical thinking (all traits typical of Western democratic institutions and pedagogy) put together can be source of polarization that a foreign attacker can exploit against democracy + appeal to universal human rights + free speech + critical thinking. — neomac

Of course bad actors will abuse things like freedom of speach and so on. But the authoritarian looks at democracies being weak with all the woke nonsense. Yet in fact it's the authoritarians who are in the fundamentally weak, because they actually fear their people.

1. Appeal to morality doesn’t fixes per se clashes in moral sensitivity over lots of political issues: wealth redistribution, immigration, abortion, gender relations, religion, environment, etc. — neomac

Yes, but just look at those questions. They basically have a question of morality inside them, even if many aren't just a moral problem. You cannot "appeal" to morality. You have to make your case for your solution to the moral problem.

2. Leading by moral example is effective depending on moral sensitivity. Besides it doesn’t necessarily bring about the morally desirable collective behaviour in people by itself (namely without law enforcement), because people can be morally fallible no matter what is morally desirable. BTW one way people show moral fallibility is their disposition to detect hypocrisy in others more than in themselves, and often for the wrong reasons (since they assume their moral sensitivity to be the universal moral compass). — neomac

Yet leading by example goes only so far. If others won't pick up your example, refute that your wellbeing and prosperity happen because of "your example", they won't go along.

3. Political activism to moralize homeland politics is exploitable by rival foreign powers. And anti-Western authoritarian regimes have an asymmetric advantage to sow division over Western democracies. — neomac

And that usually can hit back at you very hard, if you aren't sensitive enough. Giving the "You People" talk to a crowd on how they should do a you do can sound arrogant and contemptuous. Anti-Western authoritarian government will do their propaganda, but if people see that things are better in the West than they are under the authoritarian government, they will draw their own conclusions.

But what happens if none of them can fix it now, in one week, in months, in years, ever? You learn to live with it (hoping that one day it gets fixed) or you try to change the service (and hope the problem won’t replicate). — neomac

You simply have a defective product. It's your loss.

as if you were hinting at some solution, it looks rather empty to me. — neomac

Look, what I'm saying that if you want a functioning democracy, a prosperous country, then a lot of things have to be right. And if go to the DRC, we cannot think to change things to be like Switzerland. But what we can do is that they could be at least like in Botswana? Probably yes. That would be a huge improvement. First of all, you cannot think that a country is a democracy without all the necessary institutions and by just having elections.

Why can’t these problems be fixed in a morally satisfying way as in Finland? That’s what needs to be understood better. — neomac

Because you have to start with the reality that you have. Like for example the US. What it desperately needs is for it's citizens to think that the government works for them, and not the oligarchs. The only way for people to change their views is for the government really seen to work for them. What is happening now that some are pinning their hopes on an idiot reforming things and others are seeing how blatantly even without any fig leaf of the republic working as it's supposed to do.

The blatant error is thinking that somehow it's billionaires, that already enjoy the current system, would somehow reform the system. But Americans believe that these people are some kind of supermen. Poor people are stupid, billionaires have to be really smart, because they are billionaires, right? The public reaction to the shooting of a CEO is telling. What the country would have needed is for example that during the Financial Crisis, the Wall Street banks would have been treated like how the government treated the Savings & Loans bankers. That would have given credibility to the system.

So, in your opinion, there is no legal or de facto barriers to stop Trump from declaring himself El Presidente for life with unlimited executive powers? — kazan

Basically just the sycophant acolytes around him advising that his base wouldn't like it. As I posted on another thread, the most likely outcome here is a "competitive authoritarianism" where there are elections and a opposition, but the whole structure is rigged towards the leader. There will be elections, but sure as hell Trump will do what he already tried the last time around.

Sounds like the USA's constitution and political structure isn't worth defending because the Founding Fathers created a flawed country that has lasted well past its use or repair by date.

Due for a new model? Maybe it's getting that new model now? — kazan

It's not flawed or well past it's use. That would be basically what the authoritarians will market: Trump, or the "El Presidente" as in the Latin American model, has to circumvent the "corrupt" Parliament and judges. That's their line here. So they are already giving here "the new model".

It's from the "El Presidente" playbook: the opposition is the enemy and thus it has to be fought every way possible. The kind of consensus building that happens in a democracy is wrong and trying to make changes through legislation takes too much time and his the possibility of the "enemy", the opposition, to go against it.

2024 ... a whole two years into the war, and only to "replenish stocks" — boethius

This arms deal is simply the common sense and nearly inevitable result of sending nearly all the ammunition available to get used up in Ukraine — boethius

Well, you answered it yourself.

Now, NOW! they totally see the threat now and they are totally telling us the truth Now. — boethius

Well, because the Trump team is basically hostile to Ukraine and on the side of Russia. So yes, that indeed is really a change here.

"Saying stuff" is not building up arms in any meaningful way, whether to send into Ukraine as the "last line of defence" or then for your own preperation. — boethius

Poland isn't just "saying stuff". The way the Finnish military has started to train it's reservists isn't just "saying stuff".

Or news like this:

(Breaking Defense, 2024) German manufacturer Rheinmetall received its largest order in company history today: a deal with Germany for 155mm artillery ammunition, valued at up to €8.5 billion ($9.1 billion) and which will replenish Bundeswehr, Ukrainian and other allies’ stocks.

The European firm said in a statement that a framework contract for the ammunition was signed by Annette Lehnigk-Emden, president of the Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Technology and In-Service Support (BAAINBw), and Rheinmetall representatives in Koblenz.

“The order is primarily intended to increase the stocks of the German Armed Forces and its allies and to support Ukraine in its defensive struggle” added the manufacturer. It did not disclose the quantity of artillery shells on order but noted that deliveries are expected to start in “early 2025.”

Well ... why the fuck aren't they already ramped to the fucking max already in 2022 when the war that war to "stop Putin in Ukraine" started? — boethius

As I said, they were very slow to see the threat. Remember that Germany isn't anymore divided, it has Poland between it and Russia. And the US was still there to back NATO up. Poland has seen the light. Not Italy, France and so on.

And people falsely fell to Putin's scares of WW3.

Perhaps many here can agree that Trump's USA it's not classical fascism, but simply authoritarianism. Steven Levitsky & Lucan Way argue that the US is an example of competitive authoritarianism. Worth listening to:

It's so clear and blatant.

And all in the whim of basically what? An executive order? Or even without that?

Americans should understand that this is severe breach of the separation of powers and a Republic simply doesn't function like this. An autocracy works like this. The US has now gone overboard to be quite similar as Latin American countries, which try to change their huge problems with a President taking on dictatorial powers. And the end result is usually ugly.

If you think that things might change when Midterms come, will they? Even if a huge Democrat win. Trump is already sidelining the Congress, why would he then consider more.

DOGE simply tries to do quickly as much as possible before it is shut down.

An American senator explaining just what has happened and speaking the truth. What is notable, is that in Munich that the bipartisan delegation from the Congress were from both sides were supporting Ukraine. Until Trump did what he did.



Americans really should wake up on what is happening and how dangerous this is for the World. And it should be noteworthy to the Europeans here that there are many Americans like van Hollen, who are still for freedom and Atlantic alliance and understand the betrayal that Trump has done and is trying to do.

What is promising is that several conservative commentators that have been in the Trump train, did have reacted to the lies of Trump and the absurdity what the Mad House of Trump is doing and have at least corrected the lies.

Like Ben Shapiro (see from 4:58 onwards)


And some darling commentators of the anti-woke have also went against Trump, like Douglas Murray, who goes through the lies of Trump in New York Post:

You can criticize Zelensky, complain. But we should be under no illusions about who started this fire and who the true dictator or villain of this tragic tale is.

Trump has a chance to bring an end to this war, to stop the killing. Maybe even win a Nobel Peace Prize. But he will not be honored if the peace is an appeasement, one that bows down in the face of evil as it denies obvious truths.

The judgment of history will be even harsher — decades of peace and prosperity in Europe and America thrown away to a resurgent Russia harassing the East. Without a strong peace, it won’t be just Ukraine that suffers. It is all of us.

That is the ultimate truth.

(See Mr. President: Putin is THE dictator and 10 Ukraine-Russia war truths we ignore at our peril )

I might agree with these guys on everything and sometimes harshly disagree, but they are totally correct here. Worth reading that article above. Let's hope that this kind of sanity will prevail in the US and the House of Trump will stop the worst nonsense. Conservatism and the MAGA-loonies are still different things.

Ok, but what does any of that have to do with anything Jeff Sachs or I said? — Tzeentch

Actually, one thing I agree: Europe has to look after itself, because Trump has become the lapdog of Russia. I think I know the apologetics of Jeff Sachs, we've discussed that already.

Because they don't view Russia as a genuine military threat to the EU. — boethius

Lol. :lol:

Well, that's delusional and simply false. No, up until this week, Europeans have truly believed that the US is an ally. With US and NATO allies, there's such a mismatch, that there hasn't been a reason to spend so much more on the military. There was ample deterrence. Yes, it's not just Trump that has been talking about the "Pivot to Asia", that started with Obama. But taking a bigger role in defense of Europe and the US going along with Russia are quite two things. The military threat of Russia is totally real. This week, the threat of a larger war in Europe just increased. And so will likely the Russian hybrid attacks.

Where do I start...

From last year:

“We certainly face military risks. Putin’s war in Ukraine is the single largest threat to our security. This year, Russian defense spending is on track to exceed the collective contributions of all EU member states combined.

Therefore, we need to ramp up our efforts, understanding that readiness for the worst can prevent it from happening. Given the scale of these challenges, we must work together as Europeans to bring about change,” emphasized von der Leyen during her latest speech in Brussels.

Speaking during the Zbigniew Brzezinski Lectures series at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, Sikorski also said Europe was prepared to take responsibility for its own security.

In this context, he stressed Poland’s defense expenditure of 4.3% of GDP, which he said would increase next year to 4.7% and may go higher in the future. He said Poland had no desire for a military confrontation with Russia but had been a victim of Moscow’s imperialism too many times in the past. He said Poland knew what it is to live under tyranny and had no wish to return to it.

“We, Poland, will do whatever it takes not to become a Russian colony again, whatever anybody else does,” he said.

Describing Russia as an existential threat to global stability, especially in Europe, Sikorski compared its credibility with North Korea’s.

Do you not follow the news? — boethius

I do. Do you follow the thread, as you refer to two months ago? A lot happened this week.

Militarily Russia isn't winning Ukraine, but Trump is giving Putin the biggest political support ever.

As Trump is crushing the Atlanticism, and ending Pax Americana, Putin can be very happy. Alexander Dugin stated that this was the (and should be the goal) of Russia, and thanks to Trump, Putin is achieving his objectives.

Just as actually a Finnish politician that I really loathe, is for the first time saying something that I have to agree with: Trump can also throw Finland under the bus as he has done with Ukraine.

Well, Trump can obviously give absolutely anything as an executive order, because why not? He doesn't care a shit about how the Republic works and is sidelining the Congress and attacking the judiciary.

When Trump parrots Kremlin's lines, nothing else could better justify Putin's actions.

Pax Americana is dead and we are closer to war, if Europe doesn't get it's act together. Or at least form a willing coalition. Because Putin won't stop and he already has his sights on next targets.

(Financial Times)Russia used the first round of talks with the US over ending the war in Ukraine to demand the withdrawal of Nato forces from the alliance’s eastern flank, triggering concern in Europe that the Trump administration could acquiesce to seal a peace deal, Romania’s government said.

Cristian Diaconescu, the Romanian president’s chief of staff and adviser for defence and national security, said on Wednesday that the US delegation had rejected Moscow’s demand, but that there were no guarantees that Washington would not eventually make this concession to Vladimir Putin.

It's likely as Trump is Putin's poodle, he will likely give in. Likely it will be announced as "pivoting against China". Likely Trump will unleash a similar attack towards Europe as he did against Zelenskyi, if (and hopefully when) Europe stands with Ukraine.

And badmouthing Zelenskyi is done obviously to sell the Americans the surrender deal of throwing Ukraine under the bus. And Trump can surely throw other European countries under the bus too.

Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia were never of much interest or value to the West, until the 199'0's, when they were opened up to capitalist predation. — Vera Mont

Well, before the 1990's they were behind the Iron Curtain and basically it would be WW3 to mingle with them. The Iron Curtain was also in the minds of the Western alliance. As is now the idea of all Russians being on the side of Putin.

This was first seen in Hungary actually, when Eisenhower didn't intervene. As I've said on the Ukraine thread, Russia has always tried to mimick not only the crushing of the Hungarian uprising, but especially the military operation Danube, the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. It tried to repeat at the the start of the first Chechen War and tried again to do this in the start of this war in February-March, and utterly failed in the operation of capturing Kyiv.

Here's the delusionality of the Trump adminstration shown so well: JD Vance continues to rant in CPAC after Munich.



Europe has already started to close it's borders and for example Denmark has always been one of the countries against mass migration. We have already closed totally our eastern border against the international agreements that we've signed. And the EU is OK with that as they understand the threat of hybrid attacks. So this is all bullshit intended to create this idea of "woke Europe" that doesn't handle these issues, as if populist loonies are the only answer.

And furthermore, the whole "culture war" issue is meaningless chatter compared to the Pandora's box now opened by the US surrender. And I think these people are totally clueless on what is happening. Vance believes the 4-D chess negotiation tactic of Trump. As if Trump would suddenly change for the Putin's happy poodle -stance that he has had for even earlier than his presidency.

Some people want to repeat history.

This development, with Trump openly supporting Putin, is by far the most serious international and foreign policy crisis since 9/11. — Wayfarer

Far more serious, actually. Terrorist attacks were a minor issue than actually Europe-scale war.

I think it's the most serious crisis in Europe since the Cold War. Pax Americana has died. Thanks to Trump, Europe took a giant step towards war. Russia is now putting it's sights on the Baltic. Next thing is for Putin to make Trump to ask that US forces would be withdrawn from Eastern Europe.

It's a very bleek and dark future ahead of us.

At least the English press got Trump 100% correct what he is:

You have seen it what it is. I'm afraid that when those that have seen the horrible face of true totalitarian system die of old age, we take for granted all the perks of a democratic society and engage in stupid "Culture Wars".

Hungary had it's uprising in 1956 crushed by the Russian boot, yet Orban is now pro-Russian seems a bit puzzling. Putin is quite the similar Russian as the Soviets were in 1956, only doesn't have the intact Empire that Soviet Union had.

And Trump is falling totally to Putin, with the dictator telling him lies of possibilities of investments in Russian energy and mineral wealth. Which is all bullshit, he won't give anything to a fools and Putin's idea isn't to open up his country.

There's also a matter of US intelligence. — jorndoe

Satellite technology isn't limited as it was in the 1970's. When there's a will, there's a way.

Either way, European cooperation, sooner rather than later, seems the way to go. — jorndoe

Hope this happens. The worst thing is simply to deny what just happened or then think that the best way would be to wait for Trump's term in office to run out.

You're giving my calculator a headache — magritte

Well, of course it can be "fake news", but here's the source. Wikipedia gives similar statistics (here)

Part of it is their indifference - some of which comes from past disappointment. Part of it is that representatives are not readily accessible in person. But the incumbents do - in my riding, anyway - send around periodic newsletters with their contact information at the constituency office as well as the one in Ottawa or Toronto. — Vera Mont

Social media and it's algorithms is one thing to blame. But yes, I would encourage people to be active in politics. Even more active than I am.

Joke from the old 'communist' Russia: Two men are standing on the corner, waiting for a streetcar. A Mercedes goes by, shortly followed by a Lada. One man turns to the other, "Tell me, comrade, which is the better car?" The other answers without hesitation, "The Lada, of course." "If you think that," asys the first man, "you don't know cars." "Oh, I know cars. But I don't know you," — Vera Mont

It's a reality that I experienced in my youth. I have told this, but I'll tell it again. My parents were scientists and they invited many visiting scientist to our house. Twice were there scientists from the Communist bloc, which both encounters taught me a lot. First came two Soviet women. In pairs, of course, as they had to check each other. At first the dinner table conversations were science and family and how lovely places are in the summer. Then came Glasnost, openes, and the second time only one came. And basically the first thing she told to us was "Did you know that Stalin killed my father?" Her father's mistake was that he had been an aircraft engineer and had studied in Germany, which naturally made him a spy. In the 50's her mother had been informed about the death of his husband and said that it had been an error. The other example was a lively latino man from Cuba, named Jesus. He could visit Finland as he was a card carrying member of the Communist party of Cuba and a staunch believer in Castro. It was 1989 and I asked him what he thought about the events in Romania (which was having it's revolution). My father tried to show with his hand that this wasn't a good topic to talk about. But Jesus got so excited, yes, he had been in Romania and Ceaucescu's secret police, Securitate, had jailed him for a while. Because, he obviously was a foreigner as he didn't look Romanian. And we had a lively discussion on Cuba, Finnish economic history and how he hoped that Cuba could be like Sweden. When I was taking Jesus back to his hotel (I had just gotten my drivers licence), Jesus admitted that he had been for years in East Germany and in the Soviet Union and never had he talked about politics with foreigners. Never.

Those encounters made a huge impact on me. Now people are usually friendly and nice, but once there is this authoritarian rule forced down upon them, it does change things how they behave. And of course now Russia has gone back to those days of the Soviet Union. Russia has far more political prisoners now than during the time of Brezhnev or later. Expats are really frightened what has happened to their country.

Hence this is one of those true alarm bells, a "canary in the coal mine": when open political debate dies, when politics becomes too heated, too divisive or people become too scared to talk politics with people they don't know so well, the foundations of a democracy are threatened.

Even if Finnish politicians are as virtuous as you claim (the rise of right-wing populism in Finland, pro-Russian sentiment and problematic future of NATO makes me doubt Finns are immune from growing political polarisation and controversies), — neomac

The migration issue has naturally been a similar discussion as in other parts of Europe, however the True Finns -party, which is the local populist party, is and has been accepted into coalitions and actually is now in the present administration. However unlike the typical populists, they are all for Ukraine. Here is the party leader giving a speech to the Ukrainian parliament and getting a standing ovation:



If you would listen to the speech (with English captions), you think this populist favor what Trump just did? Heck, the guy has been fined for "hate speech", so we know the woke police too that painted him as the dangerous far right. Sorry, but here in Finland we do have also unity, and not braindead polarization at all levels, even if the culture war issues have been discussed(agued).

But, more to the point, how much of their satisfying political performance compared to other states’ leaders, does actually empower Finnish politicians to instill wider social cohesion among nations, make them understand the utter peril of political polarization and get the real support of their people, genuinely answer to the worries of the people, and that the best thing is to tell things how they are, don't lie? — neomac

Quite confusing what you say here. First of all, domestic politics should be left to sovereign states. You don't start messing in others own politics and work with all administrations from one country. It's an issue that at normal relations you wouldn't touch at all (unlike Vance did). But to get wider cohesion, well, basically Finland got Sweden also to join in NATO, even if Sweden had to haggle a lot with Turkey.

In other words, as long as the information flow in Western-style democracies has certain features that by institutional design can be hacked by authoritarian regimes against Western democracies themselves (not vice versa), and independently from Western people or politicians’ best intentions or education, prohibiting social platforms from collecting data won’t off-set this asymmetric advantage which authoritarian regimes are benefiting from as authoritarian. — neomac

First, do cut down with the sentences. Very hard to read.

Secondly, a functioning democracy, a republic, needs a lot from both it's citizens and it's institutions. Those institutions have to function so that the citizens appreciate them, which isn't something that you get only with free elections. Those countries incapable of having a functioning republic will have the extremely stupid idea of authoritarianism being the solution. It won't be, it will make just things far worse, because an authoritarian state can easily just let loose unrestricted corruption, oligarchy or nepotism.

So turning authoritarian can more easily offset this asymmetric advantage: I think Trump is on this path. — neomac

That's a path to hell. And the US has chosen that path. At worst, they really might have the civil war looming in the future. The more likely outcome is that the US is more like the countries in Latin America.

No. I didn't realise the importance of politics until late in life. I found it boring.
I only knew that Tories were bad! I didn't have that education that is sorely needed. — Amity

I think this is absolutely crucial for the whole system of democracy to work. It's not boring and above all, it's crucial that people actually do have a link to the actual political system. I don't think people especially at the communal level are weasels or are trying to make a career out of it. It's many times that these people have more of a duty. So if the conservatives are bad, then meet your local labour, go really to listen to them.

I cannot overstate the effect of what it means to really have a small discussion about political issues as we have here with members of parliament. They usually are quite sane and far more intelligent and aware than you get from the media.

Far too easily politics and those involved in it carry like a stigma. At worst, they really in the Third World are thugs, who use violence. It's the alienation of people from the system that drives them to people like Trump or the populists, who depict other parties as the enemy.

One crucial issue is that you can talk about politics even with strangers. That's the first thing that happen in real authoritarian regimes: nobody talks politics. It's far too dangerous.

Just standing by isn't an option, is it? — Amity

It's only a very bad option.

What Ukraine needs are REAL security guarantees, not "peacekeepers" especially if there is no peace. Starting with the Budapest memorandum, I would think that Ukrainians don't trust papers with signatures so much.

Follow-up. What can be done to improve democracy?

Compulsory voting? — Amity

I
No. It's only a right and can only be a right.

Education of the citizens. — Amity

Yes. Starting with an education system that educates how the democracy works and general knowledge about the economy, history and international relations. You cannot have a democracy with ignorant citizens.

But then, what recourse if things don't turn out as expected. If chaos ensues.
How do we make rogue, criminal Presidents accountable? — Amity

It's up to the people themselves. How strong are your institutions? Is your population engaged in politics.

Just ask yourself: Have you been active in your country's politics, are you a member of a political party or have been at least a candidate in elections? Or among your friends and family, do you have these people?

I haven't been active myself, other than consistently have voted. But I have friends that have been candidates and know from childhood one member of Parliament and have in my work several times met and discussed things with members of Parliament.

Trump is simply living in a delusional world where he can make solutions like the Mar-a-Gaza or have Canada be the 51st state. That the US can elect such idiots is the problem.

There's still sanity in Washington DC, just like Republican Senator Wicker, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee



As he said: "Putin cannot be trusted. He is a warcriminal and should be in jail for the rest of his life, if not executed."

That's the correct thinking.

Trump can perhaps see everybody else as his rivals, except Bibi's Israel or Victor's Hungary. But he lives in his ignorant senile dreamworld were his enemies are his friends and the Allies of the US are it's enemies, because they got so well with Obama.

Indeed it was and we learnt about it only later. Unfortunately, nuclear weapons are a serious topic now for Europe to discuss. Europe can easily get it's conventional gear to defend itself, but what is lacking is the nuclear balance. And how will the nuclear deterrence be formed? UK and France have about 500 nuclear weapons, but they are for national defense.

Baerbock let it slip the other day that the EU is prepairing €700billion aid package for Ukraine. Apparently it was being kept quiet until after the German election. Looks like Europe is going to step up to the plate after all. — Punshhh

It's totally possible. Germany already hinted at how this is done. The American way: just increase the debt, and you don't have to cut social welfare and other costs.

It was always going to happen, with or without US help. The day Putin threatened Europe with nuclear attack the day of the invasion, European history changed. Now they will re-arm and take care of their own security. — Punshhh

Actually, Trump was crucial here. All the pivot talk to Asia was one thing. Even in Munich Zelenskyi was told by a delegation of Democrat and Republican senators that Ukraine will have the backing of the US. Now Trump has shown his real intensions of simply giving Ukraine on a platter to Russia. Trump is now basically doing a deal about Eastern Europe as Ribbentrop did with Molotov, which surely won't go unnoticed in countries that were divided back then.

The US is extricating itself from the Ukraine debacle, while Washington sycophants like NATO Secretary Mark Rutte are preaching that 'Europe must prepare for war!', even though public support for deeper involvement, or indeed any involvement at all, is and has been thin, and is thinning further still. — Tzeentch

Trump going to bed with Putin will likely have the opposing effect on Europe. It all depends if European wake up. We are quite aware of the threat that Russia poses and so is Poland, it's countries like Germany, France and the UK that should respond and approach their people. The silliness of this being "warmongering" when Russia is making hybrid attacks on NATO countries is simply Russian propaganda.

Russia will negotiate peace only when continuing the war can lead to a worse situation for Russia. Trump handing over Ukraine on a silver platter to Putin isn't a solution, and luckily the Ukrainians understand this. The Trump surrender plan won't go anywhere. This surrender monkey gave the Taleban Afghanistan, so we have to understand that he wants to surrender Ukraine to Russia. Time to have that spine, Europe!

There is no greater threat to European security than for it to involve itself directly into a conflict with Russia while Uncle Sam is standing on the sideline harboring ulterior motives. — Tzeentch

The aid given to Ukraine has been very small, and Europe has already given more than a half of that aid to Ukraine. Russian advances have been minimal and it's incapable of now rapidly taking over Ukraine.

Maybe they do, but perhaps they only need to create sufficient confusion and division to paralyze disjointed multinational leadership. — magritte

Well, that multinational leadership was what the US had, and this is what they are trashing here.

Trump simply doesn't understand the backlash his arrogant and contemptuous behavior is having. Ukrainians are rallying around their president in the spat that Trump and Zelenskyi are having and even Trudeau's popularity have risen thanks to the 51st state nonsense.

Is this normal in tone and content coming from an ally? — magritte

No.

But very normal from a populist politician who will talk to his base all times and who doesn't give a speech on his role or on what the subject issue of the conference is about.

Who would benefit from the resulting confusion among the European leadership? — magritte

They want the MAGA revolution to happen in Europe too.

Four years would do it. Perhaps when Trump is 82 years old and sworn in for his third term. Then we can discus this again. Hopefully you or I will find this thread and continue it then.

Well that was a tight brush with destiny. But remember that then Russia had only a few intercontinental missiles back then. That's why somebody like general Curtis LeMay was for having that round with the Soviets. Just a couple of million Americans would have died, so what's the problem? By the 1980's it was different and then it really was a different number of the ICBMs. So when Able Archer '83 came around and the Soviets nearly went to nuclear war (anticipating that Reagan would make a surprise nuclear attack), that was in my lifetime too.

And Hey! We all lived through a pandemic, remember? That wasn't so bad. According to one statistic, only seven million deaths in the world and one million in the US. And since your old, but having this discussion with me, likely you have had the flew and didn't die (obviously). Trump cannot get us to WW3, he will fail even in that. :wink:

If you mean they need to further integrate, I think they will, with China as an ally. It's their only choice. — frank

No. It's not our only choice. It's not something that China would be so enthusiastic about either. We can have normal ties to China and if they go all imperialistic, then we can do our share. But you don't need to be allies with them and likely they wouldn't be excited about the idea either. Russia is a containable threat and the US isn't a threat. It's just Trump that is annoying.

The EU (+ UK and Norway) could easily give twice as much as they are giving now. They just should really build the defense industry up, simply put it. They could easily make the investment to defense, if they think defense is an important matter. Heck, Sweden ALREADY had actual nuclear weapons! It's not so hard.

It's hard to believe, but that was the fact. I already posted this, but it's history that usually isn't well known.

Not a chance — frank

Why not? It's just allies of the US getting closer to each other and contemplating on how to respond to a situation where Americans have these fits of Trump.

I think Vance comes next, and he much younger and smarter than Trump. — frank

We are just one month into MAGA paradise. We haven't even had the trade wars. Americans have not tasted the victory of tariffs when they buy food at the local grocery. Believe me, a lot can happen with Trump around. Like living another month in MAGA paradise.

If Trump invites Putin back into the fold, and it seems likely, it will thrown Putin a lifeline, just when the Russian economy was really beginning to fold under the impact of sanctions. Then if the US signs off on a 'peace deal' that gives an inch to Russian demands (as you can bet they will), Putin will say that he's had a major win, even if he didn't succeed in totally occupying Ukraine as per the initial aim. Then what? Do Ukraine and Europe try to continue the fight against a revitalised Russia without US support? Will the US say then that Ukraine are not observing whatever treaty they've tried to impose? If the UK puts 'boots on the ground' and the other European nations follow suit, it looks awfully like a war between Europe and Russia, with the US at least tacitly supporting Putin.

This is the stuff of nightmares. And it kept me awake last night. — Wayfarer

I sleep quite well here on the border to Russia. Doesn't effect my sleeping. My country's military has already been for years preparing for war. Ci vis pacem, para bellum.

Yes, Trump is rescuing Putin from a defeat. Actually the dire situation of Putin can be seen from that he is even willing to participate in talks. Then he can look at how the "peace keepers" behave. Shoot them with a tank. First say it was an accident (or something as crazy). Then wear them down. Or have you buddies China there and then venture into Ukraine to get some "war criminal" or something. Behave in Ukraine as Israel behaves in Lebanon, or something like that.

Then get Trump to withdraw forces from the Baltics. Have Trump talk down on the Balts, by how badly they take care of their Russian minorities or so. And behold what do you know? You will have ethnic violence in the Baltic states and Russia has to send peacekeepers to defend the ethnic Russians there, or there simply go "volunteers", just as for years before 2022 Russian "volunteers" were fighting in the Donbas with tanks and artillery.

And because it's a "domestic crisis" and not an "invasion" and the Balts are anyway nazis, so why would the US lift a finger. EU members shouldn't get involved, they should first get their democracies working, as JD Vance said.

Then I'll respond to you there.

Not only, you are 100% unable to find politicians that do what you wish them to do. Not only, you are also 100% unable to persuade enough people to make win politicians which would do what you wish them to do. — neomac

Well, in my country politicians do act like that.

For starters, they understand that they will get to power only by forming a coalition. Now if they go on and personally attack other politicians ad hominem and basically dehumanize other parties, they will surely now that the party won't have anything to do with you and the politician will be your enemy for the rest of your life. The kind of attacks and then total turnarounds that happen in US politics would be treated as utter dishonesty and spinelessness. Sorry, but we don't have that fake Professional wrestling theatre that State side Americans have and love so much.

It's the US that has a severe problem with it's citizens thinking that their real enemy is their own government. That's just a bizarre, unhealthy state which leaves you prone to attacks by your enemies. We here know what a real enemy looks like. We might not like everything the government does, but it still isn't the enemy our grandfathers fought.

This truth should curb any temptation to assess politicians’ performance more subjectively, namely based on what we think it’s desirable independently from what they actually can do. At least in a philosophy forum. — neomac

In a philosophy forum politicians performance should be assessed objectively. You can go to social media and talk with your friends about what subjectively they mean to you.

Secondly, politicians do not move in a vacuum of pre-existing contingent cultural and historical factors that constrain and shape their options. — neomac

Yes. And that's why in some countries politicians kill each other and are surrounded by armed gangs. We might call the warlords, but actually they are politicians.

If Trump has been elected despite being a “fascist douche” and is now able to centralise power in his hands maybe as no other American president could in the past, it would be more enlightening to dig into the pre-existing historical and geopolitical circumstances which favoured his rise to power. — neomac

And that has actually been discussed here on the forum, if you haven't noticed. January 6th was the only a deer-in-the-headlights moment for other politicians. But now Trump is far more ready in what he tries to do. What now he doing is simply bypassing everything and using executive power as a king, and the whole system is getting again this "deer-in-the-headlights" moment and calling "he cannot do it". And that's why it seems he's doing so much, because there isn't any "separation of powers", the Congress is just an annoying speed bump and it's power, just as the courts, should be taken away.

So have that civil war everybody has wanted and talked so much about.

Europe just needs to work on developing its relationship with China. — frank

Europe should get it's shit together at first.

I really think that Europe should first approach Canada, as they have to take the same shit from Trump as we do and don't want to cut all relations with Americans. Remember that Trump won only a narrow victory, and there are many Americans that don't like Trump either.

Yep, Zelenskyi and the Ukrainians clearly wanted to be part of that thing.

Next one to try the tight rope walking will be UK's Keith Starmer. As if Trump would be interested in hearing what Starmer says. But hey, Trump hasn't yet met the new King (or at least Charles as a king), so I guess that there's something that Trump would be interested in the UK.

I think the basic problem is that too many European leaders act if Trump would be a normal political leader, which he isn't. They ought to simply be far more tougher, because with that they'll get the idiot's respect. Publicly humiliating him won't work.

The only thing I dislike is that I perceive that there are still some negative prejudices against us. The coronavirus crisis was a good example of that. I remember Mark Rutte and the Finance Minister of The Netherlands saying very negative comments on Spain and Portugal. — javi2541997

And that's what Trump doesn't understand. If a leader of one nation directly goes to badmouth another nation, out of nowhere it creates resentment and hostility. And especially when you don't know just what the hell you are talking about.

There's on saying about the British, they just love to criticize their Royalty, but a foreigner criticizing their royalty? Now way.

So then Trump repeating Kremlin talking points and making the deals with Putin on Ukraine and seems also Eastern Europe won't fly so well. But naturally he doesn't know what the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement meant to Poland, Finland, The Baltic States and Romania. But they will, once the media in these countries will report things as they are.