, Australia hasn't had tariffs on US imports for a couple of decades. Transparent rhetoric.

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.

: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.

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}

, 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.

US, Ukraine agree to terms of critical minerals deal — NOS4A2

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}

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.)

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

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?

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.

, FYI, I updated an old post (Feb 15, 2025); the dictator (illegitimate president) thing originates at the Kremlin.

Clever. :)

Zelenskyy says he would step down if Ukraine can join NATO, blasts Trump mineral pitch
^{— Cybele Mayes-Osterman · USA TODAY · Feb 23, 2025}

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}

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.

, 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 balance — ssu

There's also a matter of US intelligence.

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

So has Vance.... It's easy to say no when your self-interest is not at stake. — Vera Mont

:up: Poilievre is susceptible enough

, 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.

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?

Not a chance — frank

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.

, even though he's a nuisance, hasn't Poilievre expressed a "No" to Trump?

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.

Elon Musk says journalists 'deserve a long prison sentence' as spat with CBS 60 Minutes continues
^{— Reanna Smith · Irish Star · Feb 18, 2025}

Discredit, take over, or remove? More Putinism?
Well, all critique is "TDS", "fake news", "woke" or whatever cultural trend they dislike today, right?

^{(from an earlier comment, Sep 10, 2024, evidence-collection and observations continue)}

NATO was an excuse

Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and status as a country, was established in 1991 more or less throughout the world. That was a couple of years after the Berlin Wall came down. Changes were in the air.

The relationship between Ukraine and NATO goes back to Ukraine’s independence: increased cooperation in 1994, 1997, 2002, 2005; decreased 2010; increased 2014, 2018; U-turn 2022; back again 2022; …

Sometime before 2009, the Kremlin circle (ex-KGB and the like) decided that it would be intolerable to lose control over Crimea, and perhaps lose empowering influence on Ukraine, something along those lines, and that they would need a land bridge to whatever they hence might have to grab. A new or extended Kharkiv Pact wouldn’t do, for example. Couldn’t be left to an independent country to decide.

And that uncompromising decision marked, and set, the — henceforth seemingly inevitable — collision course of which we’ve seen the results. Likely not an overnight decision, more like an irredentist, “entitled”, “ownership”, or revanchist sentiment, possibly since the Cold War in those circles.

It’s a thread throughout (elsewhere, 2013, 2018, 2021, 2024).

Ukraine wrestling free from the dominating, northern neighbor, wouldn’t be easy — isn’t easy. And their NATO aspirations were, perhaps predictably (2022, 2022), a useful excuse for the Kremlin to attack/invade, (pseudo-)annex (2014, 2022), assimilate, regardless of Ukraine’s sovereignty. If their rationale was merely NATO, then what was all this about, and what was accomplished? Besides, something similar would apply to any strong defence that Ukraine would seek membership of. NATO was the most likely around to get in the way of unimpeded Russian military (or Russification) actions, and the Kremlin had years to prepare. We can now conclude that the aspirations were justified.

Quoting Wikipedia, which has the requisite references, here’s what the Ukrainians want(ed):

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption, abuse of power, human rights violations, and the influence of oligarchs. — Euromaidan (2013-2014)

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of Russia and oligarchs, police brutality, human rights violations, and repressive anti-protest laws. — Revolution of Dignity (2014)

Abandoning the Ukrainians would have the faint whiff of cowardice, broken promises, appeasement and encouragement of the attacker, more so if echoing their lines (2022, 2022) — free expansion of non-democracy.

I said it on behalf of my country, to Trump. In semi-jocular response to jorndoe's suggestion that we vote in their elections. Which, as a single state, would only give us 50 seats in Congress - 20-30 of them likely conservative - and two in the Senate. Not much of a bargain in return for our human rights, legal system, foreign policy, health care, oil, bauxite, water and lumber. — Vera Mont

Sorry, I just meant in that one election, and, given the campaign trails, and evidence that has since come about, I'd expect most Canucks (by far) to not vote P01135809. I was sort of joking, too. (Each province might be represented as a state?)

Pistorius wasn't so happy with Vance:

I am incandescent with rage right now. I feel sick to the stomach. A US Vice President stood today on the soil of where so many Americans gave their lives to defeat fascism in Europe. He delivered a disgraceful speech that spat on their graves. [...] — Truth Matters · Feb 14, 2025 · 3m:39s

Orlins is worried:

Trump’s post is a direct threat to the rule of law. This is a constitutional crisis in the making. Stay vigilant. — Eliza Orlins · Feb 16, 2025 · 1m:10s

, I'll just go ahead and add some observations.

In 1939, Stalin and Hitler made a deal.
In 2025, Lavrov and Rubio met, and Putin and Trump made a deal. ^{(← but I'm no prophet, so let's see)}

(More plain lying to everyone's faces, and no US politicians/leaders call'em out, except so-called "fake news"?)

Meanwhile, Putin and Trump's chummy dealings don't mention/address Russian ships roaming northern waters, so Canada and Greenland need US protection from them.

Many sellouts, much spinelessness, cowardice, hypocrisy, all that.

, you just want all of them/it to go away, right? Countries, states, laws, ... And any tidbit that can somehow be cast negatively (an exercise in rhetoric) is hence aired to that end? :D

If P01135809 keeps bullying Canada to become part of the US, then I suggest Canadian voters first be allowed to vote on the US candidates from the last US election, even though it's late. ;) Add the new votes to those previously found, determine election winner, done. Think the current administration would accept?

Trump Says He’s Serious About Wanting Canada to Become 51st U.S. State
^{— Jill Colvin, Darlene Superville · TIME, AP · Feb 9, 2025}

European leaders gather for an emergency meeting after Trump snub
^{— Raf Casert, Sylvie Corbet, Dusan Stojanovic, Vanessa Gera, Justin Spike · AP via Defense News · Feb 17, 2025}

Looks like what they don't say out loud (and shouldn't), is that P01135809 + team first alienated friends and allies, then virtually stabbed them in the back, befriended authoritarians that P01135809 can't handle anyway (Putin is smarter, unfortunately). I'm sure P01135809 and Musk (rich folks) will be fine, whereas other Americans might find eggs pricey, while rambling on about "wokeness" or whatever cultural trend they dislike.

I'd suggest Canada, and maybe others, also are invited to a subsequent meeting (following the above I mean). But don't wait too long. P01135809 (and Putin) apparently ain't.

, can GPT combine more factors? In a way that's meaningful?

Brought up in jest earlier (Feb 13, 2025) and by

I think that we should ditch the geographical locations and look more towards national values. Like a EU but globally, for stable democracies who operate on human rights. — Christoffer

Like a defense alliance of democracies or something? Hey, I'm warming to the idea.

In terms of defense, it could be modeled somewhat after NATO, and otherwise maybe somewhat after the EU (also 1789, 1948). Ehh or whatever.

From a military-strategic perspective, it's harder to secure scattered regions, though reconnaissance/observation would be good, yet, surely the values are worth standing up for, human rights, civil liberties, various freedoms and protections, so this stuff would be prerequisites. Things like (nuclear) deterrence would be needed.

Some candidates alphabetically: maybe Argentina, Australia, maybe Botswana, Canada, maybe Chile, maybe Costa Rica, some European countries, Iceland, maybe India, Japan, New Zealand, maybe Singapore, maybe South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, maybe Ukraine after some further reforms, Uruguay, some US states, some ocean countries, ... (wicked cooperative)

In absence of "an outside threat", it's going to be difficult to get those together. What about mutual economic support, close to free trade, close to free migration (or visas), ...?

Misinformation and “false beliefs” is not a threat, never has been — NOS4A2

History tells a different story.

The conflict seems fairly far removed from us here in the US. — BitconnectCarlos

According to google, the distance between ...

Hm. Weird. Canada and Greenland need protection by P01135809 from P01135809's friend.

Something did look familiar...

Trump’s Schedule F plan, explained
^{— Alex Tausanovitch, Michael Angeloni, Erica Newland, William Ford · Protect Democracy · Jun 11, 2024}

RFK Jr in, Presidential Executive Order signed:

(a) study the scope of the childhood chronic disease crisis and any potential contributing causes, including the American diet, absorption of toxic material, medical treatments, lifestyle, environmental factors, Government policies, food production techniques, electromagnetic radiation, and corporate influence or cronyism; — ESTABLISHING THE PRESIDENT’S MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN COMMISSION · The White House · Feb 13, 2025

There are already all kinds of studies (+ ongoing). Some of these areas are heavily studied. Are they fishing for different results in medical treatments (vaccines), food production techniques (GMO), electromagnetic radiation (5G), ...?

In diplomacy you engage the sides, not leave them out and decide on yourself. And the attempts on war-profiteering are made by Trump. — ssu

Sides have been engaged, which is a far cry from what Europe and NATO has done. — NOS4A2

Trump starts Ukraine peace talks as he and Putin plan Saudi meet
^{— Francesca Chambers · USA TODAY · Feb 12, 2025}

Ukraine wasn't invited.

Ukraine balks at signing Trump deal to hand over its mineral wealth
^{— Veronika Melkozerova, Joe Gould, Jamie Dettmer · POLITICO · Feb 15, 2025}

Should we expect the Putin excuse-makers and apologists soon?

Hmm... Arrest Putin while he's in the Middle East, get him on a Tulip fertilizer transport to The Hague, trial. No big deal; he'll get a slap on the wrist. I don't think there's anything out on P01135809 at this time (except at home).

, , maybe it's about power, like you snap your finger and something happens?
In days gone by, he didn't have the power to summon Putin-the-powerful.
Now he does, both, and revels in it?
(Just conjecture on my part, I'm no telepath.)

Trump Names El Chapo Ambassador to Mexico :D
^{— The Borowitz Report · Dec 1, 2024}

:D

Nearly 10,000 fired as Trump and Musk step up government purge
^{— Timothy Gardner, Leah Douglas, Nathan Layne et al · Reuters · Feb 14, 2025}
Trump Admin fires nuclear staff—Oops, they were in charge of US weapons stockpile
^{— ET Online · Feb 15, 2025}

No way. Trump and Musk tried to fire 300 nuclear officials—then realized they were the ones overseeing the U.S. nuclear arsenal and scrambled to rehire them?

You can’t make this level of incompetence up. These are the people who claim they’ll “restore order.” — Brian Allen · Feb 14, 2025

EDIT: Wait a second, did I miss an opportunity to steal some nuclear stuff...? Dang.

So far, P01135809 has followed Putin in some respects:

• (pre-emptive) strong appeal to nationalism
• gathered/appeased/rallied religious conservatives (+ extremists + disillusioned)
• threatened other countries
• efforts to sideline (or remove most) non-loyalists, merits less relevant
• moves to ditch some protection of minorities (or vulnerable)
• lied
• parroted Putin regarding Zelenskyy
• some initial steps to suppress free media (Putin is ahead)
• "our country has a sickness and I'm the cure", or whatever (campaign trails)

(Did I miss any?)

For some reason, I can picture him going "If Putin can, watch me".

EDITED links

There’s a Term for What Trump and Musk Are Doing (archive, archive)
^{— Anne Applebaum · The Atlantic · Feb 13, 2025}

Already, the Post reports, candidates for national-security posts in the new administration are being asked whether they accept Trump’s false claim to have won the 2020 election. At least two candidates for higher positions at the FBI were also asked to state who the “real patriots” were on January 6, 2021.

In some government departments, minority employees have set up affinity groups, purely voluntary forums for conversation or social events. A number of government agencies are shutting these down; others are being disbanded by organizers who fear that membership lists will be used to target people.

Ouch. Is that confirmed? The article paints a glooming picture.

Trump’s assault on USAID leaves China soft power opening in Southeast Asia (— Erin Hale · Al Jazeera · Feb 13, 2025)
China rights monitors suspend work, lay off staff after U.S. aid freeze (— Laurie Chen, Antoni Slodkowski, Clarence Fernandez · Reuters · Feb 14, 2025)
Lawmakers worry China could take over after Trump pauses foreign aid (— Chris Boccia · ABC · Feb 14, 2025)

US out, China in.

RFK Jr in
Health workers out
Regress

Who's this good for anyway?
Sue Republican?

, yep, and furthermore

Democracy has always contained the possibility of its own undoing, it just takes a majority vote of someone non- or anti-democratic. — Dec 27, 2023

, check the likes of the Unabomber, Torquemada, Capone, Escobar, Mogilevich, the Pagans, neo-Nazis, jihadists, ...