|
|
Post by musik on Oct 28, 2024 13:01:49 GMT
Thanks for the info. No, not like that, if he means opponents who haven't actually done anything. In Sweden possibly against heavy armed gangs. The article mentions Orbán, Modi and Putin. Not that surprised. |
|
|
|
Post by Gabrielzakuaniandjuliet on Oct 28, 2024 13:35:23 GMT
It's massively out of context just like the dictator on day one comment. Evil Donald Trump is the only card the left have to play because their candidate is awful |
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Oct 28, 2024 13:48:40 GMT
His speech at Madison Square Garden was as disgusting as you can get. He is sowing the seeds of violence already and some of his derogatory remarks were pure fascism. And we must never forget that the lunatic can press the red button for a nuclear war at any time. I don't give a toss for the Yanks if they vote him in but this egomaniac's power goes beyond the US boundaries. Many intellectual scholars are right when they say he's a threat to the whole world. What will he do if China decides to take Taiwan? They'll see his decision to sell Ukraine out as a sign of weakness. I hope his generals are of strong character. Also, just as they did in 2016, I can see many of his more sensible civil servants walking out and refusing to serve for him. We're living in dangerous times.
OS.
|
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 28, 2024 16:20:40 GMT
Apart from the first two lines, what a load of bollocks. He's already been president. How much of the world really changed when he was at the helm ? Not much. I can see why people don't like him, but to say he is so much worse than other politicians, I just don't get it. The main reason he wasn't worse, according to his own appointees who worked with him, saw what he is like, and now call him "fascist", is that the people around him stopped him doing stuff like shooting protesters. He caged thousands of children on purpose. An intentional mass campaign of child abuse. His justices gave the government the right to strip women of basic control over their own medical decisions. He tried to end US democracy and overthrow the election he lost. He corruptly ran business from inside government, refused to release his tax returns and used the US government's power for his own politics. He slow walked disaster aid to states that didn't vote his way, he allegedly cut government contracts to punish the free speech of the owners, and he used US resources to try and blackmail a foreign leader. Do you support all of those things as normal and fine? Notice how Musk is all in on Trump because he knows Biden or Harris won't punish him, because they support freedom of speech and will protect the rights even of those who oppose them. The other billionaires are cowering in case Trump wins because they know that he is a wannabe dictator who will use the government to hurt them if they don't fall in line. |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 28, 2024 16:31:56 GMT
I don't actually think Trump is a direct threat at an international level - he likes to think of himself as a deal maker and he leans towards isolationism if anything. Obviously this has a knock on effect in other countries who expect US support but I think it's time Europe looked at its own defensive needs, we shouldn't be relying on the whims of American politicians to look after our own interests.
|
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Oct 28, 2024 16:32:00 GMT
Thanks for the info. No, not like that, if he means opponents who haven't actually done anything. In Sweden possibly against heavy armed gangs. The article mentions Orbán, Modi and Putin. Not that surprised. Trump is talking about using the army against his political opponents - not heavily armed gangs. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 28, 2024 16:39:31 GMT
I don't actually think Trump is a direct threat at an international level - he likes to think of himself as a deal maker and he leans towards isolationism if anything. Obviously this has a knock on effect in other countries who expect US support but I think it's time Europe looked at its own defensive needs, we shouldn't be relying on the whims of American politicians to look after our own interests. I agree about Europe needing to defend itself and spend more. But that's already happening. He idolises dictators and thinks democracies are weak. I'm concerned he will use his economic and legal leverage to undermine and hurt us. Lots of weapon systems have licences he can revoke, and his trade wars will hurt Europe's economy and stoke division. Which will help Trump-like leaders. When US media is forced into line and joins Russian propaganda in undermining our institutions and democracies, it will be bad. He will try to help Putin win. If Putin wins, we're facing another massive migration wave from Ukraine, which will only help Trump-like leaders in Europe, and Trump already tried to end US democracy. He will try again. Trump will try to break NATO. If Putinists also take political power in places like Germany then you're looking at a new russian empire able to pick and choose which European countries to invade in its own time. I'm less blasé about a huge victory for worldwide dictatorship over freedom. (Oh he sells himself as a deal maker but what deals has he ever actually cut that were good?) |
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Oct 28, 2024 16:40:02 GMT
I don't actually think Trump is a direct threat at an international level - he likes to think of himself as a deal maker and he leans towards isolationism if anything. Obviously this has a knock on effect in other countries who expect US support but I think it's time Europe looked at its own defensive needs, we shouldn't be relying on the whims of American politicians to look after our own interests. I agree that Europe should pay more for it's own defence and actually Trump was right to point out that some European countries weren't delivering on their financial commitments to NATO. However I think you are wrong re the international ramifications of a Trump presidency. If the US abandons Ukraine they will struggle to maintain their territory and the Baltic states and Scandinavia come under threat of invasion. What will happen in the middle east is anyone's guess. He sees himself as a strong leader but the real strong men out there know he's someone they can manipulate. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 28, 2024 16:41:44 GMT
His speech at Madison Square Garden was as disgusting as you can get. He is sowing the seeds of violence already and some of his derogatory remarks were pure fascism. And we must never forget that the lunatic can press the red button for a nuclear war at any time. I don't give a toss for the Yanks if they vote him in but this egomaniac's power goes beyond the US boundaries. Many intellectual scholars are right when they say he's a threat to the whole world. What will he do if China decides to take Taiwan? They'll see his decision to sell Ukraine out as a sign of weakness. I hope his generals are of strong character. Also, just as they did in 2016, I can see many of his more sensible civil servants walking out and refusing to serve for him. We're living in dangerous times. OS. I put this on the Israel thread but in actual fact, it's probably just as relevant here. Giuliani is an extremely dangerous, lying racist and the MAGA's just love it! |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 28, 2024 16:57:33 GMT
I don't actually think Trump is a direct threat at an international level - he likes to think of himself as a deal maker and he leans towards isolationism if anything. Obviously this has a knock on effect in other countries who expect US support but I think it's time Europe looked at its own defensive needs, we shouldn't be relying on the whims of American politicians to look after our own interests. I agree about Europe needing to defend itself and spend more. But that's already happening. He idolises dictators and thinks democracies are weak. I'm concerned he will use his economic and legal leverage to undermine and hurt us. Lots of weapon systems have licences he can revoke, and his trade wars will hurt Europe's economy and stoke division. Which will help Trump-like leaders. When US media is forced into line and joins Russian propaganda in undermining our institutions and democracies, it will be bad. He will try to help Putin win. If Putin wins, we're facing another massive migration wave from Ukraine, which will only help Trump-like leaders in Europe, and Trump already tried to end US democracy. He will try again. Trump will try to break NATO. If Putinists also take political power in places like Germany then you're looking at a new russian empire able to pick and choose which European countries to invade in its own time. I'm less blasé about a huge victory for worldwide dictatorship over freedom. (Oh he sells himself as a deal maker but what deals has he ever actually cut that were good?) I think he'll force an end to the Russian/Ukraine war and sell it as 'his peace deal'. It'll be based on current territory which is obviously wrong but I don't see any feasible scenario where Ukraine regains what it's lost. It just doesn't have enough men left and Russia doesn't give a shit about it's own troops so it'll eventually grind down resistance through pure numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 28, 2024 17:10:04 GMT
I don't actually think Trump is a direct threat at an international level - he likes to think of himself as a deal maker and he leans towards isolationism if anything. Obviously this has a knock on effect in other countries who expect US support but I think it's time Europe looked at its own defensive needs, we shouldn't be relying on the whims of American politicians to look after our own interests. I agree that Europe should pay more for it's own defence and actually Trump was right to point out that some European countries weren't delivering on their financial commitments to NATO. However I think you are wrong re the international ramifications of a Trump presidency. If the US abandons Ukraine they will struggle to maintain their territory and the Baltic states and Scandinavia come under threat of invasion. What will happen in the middle east is anyone's guess. He sees himself as a strong leader but the real strong men out there know he's someone they can manipulate. There will be a deal based on current territories in Ukraine which in my opinion is inevitable at this stage without NATO boots on the ground. With regards the Baltic states and Scandinavia - I don't think Russia would directly attack a NATO member, NATO would have to respond and would bring its full air power to bare on a Russian army full of convicts and new recruits. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 28, 2024 17:30:27 GMT
I think he'll force an end to the Russian/Ukraine war and sell it as 'his peace deal'. It'll be based on current territory which is obviously wrong but I don't see any feasible scenario where Ukraine regains what it's lost. It just doesn't have enough men left and Russia doesn't give a shit about it's own troops so it'll eventually grind down resistance through pure numbers. I don't think the media cover the absolute state of russia's reserves enough. They've thrown everything in to looking strong now, so my point of view is why not give Ukraine fire superiority next year and give them a chance of winning? Trump will cut aid to Ukraine and then how do you imagine negotiations will go? If you're zelenskyy then what's your opening gambit with Putin? |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 28, 2024 17:58:59 GMT
I think he'll force an end to the Russian/Ukraine war and sell it as 'his peace deal'. It'll be based on current territory which is obviously wrong but I don't see any feasible scenario where Ukraine regains what it's lost. It just doesn't have enough men left and Russia doesn't give a shit about it's own troops so it'll eventually grind down resistance through pure numbers. I don't think the media cover the absolute state of russia's reserves enough. They've thrown everything in to looking strong now, so my point of view is why not give Ukraine fire superiority next year and give them a chance of winning? Trump will cut aid to Ukraine and then how do you imagine negotiations will go? If you're zelenskyy then what's your opening gambit with Putin? I just don't think Ukraine has the numeric superiority it would need at this point to perform an offensive - even with shit Russian troops, there'll be heavily mined/defended areas which will be pure meat grinders. I think negotiations will go along the lines of: To Putin: bring this war to a close or we'll be providing continued support To Zelensky: bring this war to a close or we'll be removing your support Trump is an egotistical moron - he'll want to broker a deal which he can sell as a win. Perhaps I'm wrong though. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 28, 2024 18:28:33 GMT
I just don't think Ukraine has the numeric superiority it would need at this point to perform an offensive - even with shit Russian troops, there'll be heavily mined/defended areas which will be pure meat grinders. I think negotiations will go along the lines of: To Putin: bring this war to a close or we'll be providing continued support To Zelensky: bring this war to a close or we'll be removing your support Trump is an egotistical moron - he'll want to broker a deal which he can sell as a win. Perhaps I'm wrong though. What has Trump ever negotiated successfully? And how was it an improvement over anything that anyone else could have done? I know his branding is negotiator, but I don't know what he did successfully and without being bailed out, or using crime or stealing. Putin says no cease fire until Ukraine hands over all its defensive lines and some major cities. So Putin will say no. This isn't hypothetical. This is what he's repeatedly stated. And those areas are, according to russia's constitution, Russia. Asking nicely and disarming Ukraine will not make him give up those demands. If you're Trump, do you then cut off aid to Ukraine or send more? Regarding manpower, I think that's the key question. We don't know if too many Ukrainians have been lost or not. But there's a good chance it's not and looking at russia's resources they can't keep this up without huge extra help. So why not give Ukraine a chance at victory so there can ne negotiations where the democracy is in a good position? And to my view, Ukrainian victory and membership in NATO means peace. Otherwise Putin will invade again. |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 28, 2024 18:42:49 GMT
I just don't think Ukraine has the numeric superiority it would need at this point to perform an offensive - even with shit Russian troops, there'll be heavily mined/defended areas which will be pure meat grinders. I think negotiations will go along the lines of: To Putin: bring this war to a close or we'll be providing continued support To Zelensky: bring this war to a close or we'll be removing your support Trump is an egotistical moron - he'll want to broker a deal which he can sell as a win. Perhaps I'm wrong though. What has Trump ever negotiated successfully? And how was it an improvement over anything that anyone else could have done? I know his branding is negotiator, but I don't know what he did successfully and without being bailed out, or using crime or stealing. Putin says no cease fire until Ukraine hands over all its defensive lines and some major cities. So Putin will say no. This isn't hypothetical. This is what he's repeatedly stated. And those areas are, according to russia's constitution, Russia. Asking nicely and disarming Ukraine will not make him give up those demands. If you're Trump, do you then cut off aid to Ukraine or send more? Regarding manpower, I think that's the key question. We don't know if too many Ukrainians have been lost or not. But there's a good chance it's not and looking at russia's resources they can't keep this up without huge extra help. So why not give Ukraine a chance at victory so there can ne negotiations where the democracy is in a good position? And to my view, Ukrainian victory and membership in NATO means peace. Otherwise Putin will invade again. Putin might well decide that the 'denazification' has been a success and leave it at that. Anyway its speculating, like you say, it depends on the man power available to both sides which we simply don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 28, 2024 18:56:09 GMT
Putin might well decide that the 'denazification' has been a success and leave it at that. Anyway its speculating, like you say, it depends on the man power available to both sides which we simply don't know. I think we can go deeper than speculation on some parts. Putin wants to conquer and control Ukraine. His demands are that Ukraine hand over 4 full regions in order to discuss a ceasefire. If Trump disarms Ukraine, giving him a better hope of victory, why would he surrender his demands? You don't negotiate with the lion while your head is between its jaws. Europe alone has the capacity to get Ukraine to victory at least. It'll just be longer and bloodier and gives Putin more hope he can kill enough Ukrainians to win. And if Trump wins and the US joins team dictatorship, he might just support China funding and supplying Russia. Then it's hard to imagine Europe doing enough. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Oct 28, 2024 19:22:20 GMT
Putin might well decide that the 'denazification' has been a success and leave it at that. Anyway its speculating, like you say, it depends on the man power available to both sides which we simply don't know. I think we can go deeper than speculation on some parts. Putin wants to conquer and control Ukraine. His demands are that Ukraine hand over 4 full regions in order to discuss a ceasefire. If Trump disarms Ukraine, giving him a better hope of victory, why would he surrender his demands? You don't negotiate with the lion while your head is between its jaws. Europe alone has the capacity to get Ukraine to victory at least. It'll just be longer and bloodier and gives Putin more hope he can kill enough Ukrainians to win. And if Trump wins and the US joins team dictatorship, he might just support China funding and supplying Russia. Then it's hard to imagine Europe doing enough. If Trump were to withdraw arms funding for Ukraine, it could significantly weaken Ukraine's ability to defend itself against Russia. This might embolden Putin to maintain or even escalate his demands, rather than surrendering them. Putin's goals include weakening Ukraine's ties with NATO, stymieing Ukrainian nationalism, and expanding territorial gains. Without strong military support from the US, Ukraine would be in a much more vulnerable position, making it less likely that Putin would feel compelled to compromise. |
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Oct 28, 2024 20:19:56 GMT
I don't think people realise how close Putin is to losing this war. Most of his armour has been destroyed, his army is decimated and he's been forced to bring in N. Koreans to bolster it. One more year of battling with a fully armed, defensively and offensively, Ukraine could see things dramatically turn in UKR's favour. That's why Putin wants Trump to win. Trump will pull the plug on UKR and see that Putin doesn't lose. And those who say the rest of NATO and Europe need to pull their fingers out are right.
OS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Oct 28, 2024 20:29:49 GMT
Putin might well decide that the 'denazification' has been a success and leave it at that. Anyway its speculating, like you say, it depends on the man power available to both sides which we simply don't know. Putin wants to conquer and control Ukraine. His demands are that Ukraine hand over 4 full regions in order to discuss a ceasefire. I think you've fallen for propoganda there. Do you have a Russian source which confirms these claims? |
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Oct 28, 2024 20:52:29 GMT
Putin wants to conquer and control Ukraine. His demands are that Ukraine hand over 4 full regions in order to discuss a ceasefire. I think you've fallen for propoganda there. Do you have a Russian source which confirms these claims? Isn't it more than common knowledge that before a ceasefire would be considered Putin told Ukraine it must withdraw its troops from the four regions that Russia claims to have annexed: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. He's also demanded that Ukraine abandon its ambitions to join NATO. The whole thing initially came through Reuters who spoke to five people who work with or have worked with Putin at a senior level in the political and business worlds. On top of that, Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov also reiterated the demands to Reuters. |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Oct 28, 2024 21:09:33 GMT
I think you've fallen for propoganda there. Do you have a Russian source which confirms these claims? Isn't it more than common knowledge that before a ceasefire would be considered Putin told Ukraine it must withdraw its troops from the four regions that Russia claims to have annexed: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. He's also demanded that Ukraine abandon its ambitions to join NATO. The whole thing initially came through Reuters who spoke to five people who work with or have worked with Putin at a senior level in the political and business worlds. On top of that, Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov also reiterated the demands to Reuters. Instanbul communique |
|
|
|
Post by mjg13x on Oct 28, 2024 21:14:59 GMT
Thanks for the info. No, not like that, if he means opponents who haven't actually done anything. In Sweden possibly against heavy armed gangs. The article mentions Orbán, Modi and Putin. Not that surprised. Trump is talking about using the army against his political opponents - not heavily armed gangs. I'm legitimately worried as someone who works for progressive Democrats. Sure, he probably won't send the army after me, but the fact that the thought is even on my mind is so fucked up. |
|
|
|
Post by musik on Oct 28, 2024 21:30:59 GMT
I listened to a guy called Jim Risch yesterday in an interview. He was actually said to be an ally of Trump.
He said with Trump the situation will be pretty much the same for Ukraine, they would still supporting them.
My impression of this guy was overall better than Trump (and Vance).
But it's still far too little about what they really want. A big difference to the Swedish interviews and debates prior to the National Elections.
🧑🦳
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 28, 2024 22:17:07 GMT
Trump is talking about using the army against his political opponents - not heavily armed gangs. I'm legitimately worried as someone who works for progressive Democrats. Sure, he probably won't send the army after me, but the fact that the thought is even on my mind is so fucked up. Its symbolic of how damaged and severely fucked up the situation actually is. Consider it.... a candidate for the presidency has stated an intention to use military force against people who disagree with him. Yet, he remains a possibility to be elected. He doesn’t grasp democracy. But his disciples seem fine with it. |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Oct 28, 2024 22:21:38 GMT
Isn't it more than common knowledge that before a ceasefire would be considered Putin told Ukraine it must withdraw its troops from the four regions that Russia claims to have annexed: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. He's also demanded that Ukraine abandon its ambitions to join NATO. The whole thing initially came through Reuters who spoke to five people who work with or have worked with Putin at a senior level in the political and business worlds. On top of that, Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov also reiterated the demands to Reuters. Instanbul communique I saw The Istanbul Communique support World of Twist at a Mar a Lago benefit do when they were trying to crack the states. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 28, 2024 22:45:08 GMT
They are literally fuckin nutcases! 🤦♂️
|
|
|
|
Post by mjg13x on Oct 28, 2024 23:01:07 GMT
I listened to a guy called Jim Risch yesterday in an interview. He was actually said to be an ally of Trump. He said with Trump the situation will be pretty much the same for Ukraine, they would still supporting them. My impression of this guy was overall better than Trump (and Vance). But it's still far too little about what they really want. A big difference to the Swedish interviews and debates prior to the National Elections. 🧑🦳 Risch is a relatively reasonable Republican senator as far as they go. (The bar is in hell.) He's in line to be chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee if, as expected, they win the Senate back. So he's got a decent amount of influence in the matter. That said, it won't matter what he thinks if Trump and Vance are opposed, and everything that's come out of their mouths indicates that they don't want to send another cent to Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 28, 2024 23:20:47 GMT
Christ alive, I wasn't even aware that this took place, the comments section is absolutely frightening!
|
|
|
|
Post by turtlefox on Oct 29, 2024 0:15:31 GMT
Apart from the first two lines, what a load of bollocks. He's already been president. How much of the world really changed when he was at the helm ? Not much. I can see why people don't like him, but to say he is so much worse than other politicians, I just don't get it. The main reason he wasn't worse, according to his own appointees who worked with him, saw what he is like, and now call him "fascist", is that the people around him stopped him doing stuff like shooting protesters. He caged thousands of children on purpose. An intentional mass campaign of child abuse. His justices gave the government the right to strip women of basic control over their own medical decisions. He tried to end US democracy and overthrow the election he lost. He corruptly ran business from inside government, refused to release his tax returns and used the US government's power for his own politics. He slow walked disaster aid to states that didn't vote his way, he allegedly cut government contracts to punish the free speech of the owners, and he used US resources to try and blackmail a foreign leader. Do you support all of those things as normal and fine? Notice how Musk is all in on Trump because he knows Biden or Harris won't punish him, because they support freedom of speech and will protect the rights even of those who oppose them. The other billionaires are cowering in case Trump wins because they know that he is a wannabe dictator who will use the government to hurt them if they don't fall in line. I don't believe he tried to end US democracy. A revolution with only 2 deaths is just an out of control party ! His business dealings, I'm pretty sure everyone at the top of governments isn't crystal clear about how all of their income came to be. Isolating kids from their families, not so good, nor the abortion rights but these rules do have to go through another stage of countability. It's not just Trump. I don't see Trump as the golden boy at all. He is everything that he comes across as, but I'd rather a loudmouth than a friendly enemy when it came to politics. |
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Oct 29, 2024 0:26:20 GMT
They are literally fuckin nutcases! 🤦♂️ She missed the thanks for fucking a porn star, when your wife is carrying your child, according to the book of Stormy: and the thanks for raping a look alike of your second wife, according to the book of Marla: she missed all the stuff about fraud, cowardice, corruption, racism and misogyny. Amongst the few people who are bigger hypocrites than Trump, American evangelical ‘Christians’,have to be the worst. If I believed in god, it would be comfort to know they will end up in hell. |
|
