Doesn't sound like that but one might say you're Boko Haram to him.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
President Trump
- Thread starter Brightwell’s left peg
- Start date
Luddite_Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 743
Fucking hell
"I was very upfront in my briefing on day one um that if we feel that there are lies being pushed by outlets in this room we are going to hold those lies accountable and it is a fact that the body of water off the coast of Louisiana is called the Gulf of America"
"I was very upfront in my briefing on day one um that if we feel that there are lies being pushed by outlets in this room we are going to hold those lies accountable and it is a fact that the body of water off the coast of Louisiana is called the Gulf of America"
BlueHammer85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 40,571
You are an embarrassing ****.
Glad he’s been called out. Absolute thick ****.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 21,730
Oh look, American prisoners in Russia are swapped, Putin gets a few freebies on Kyiv before “talks” start, the new SecDef tells the world Ukraine is fucked if they want their country back and Trump let’s the world know Putin’s demand for a non-NATO Ukraine is sorted.
The lesson?
Give up your nukes for NATO protection and get fucked over by a Russian puppet and his minions in the White House.
Who on earth would EVER trust America again? Who would EVER give up nukes for empty promises?
Poor Ukraine. Fucked by friends and foes alike!
The lesson?
Give up your nukes for NATO protection and get fucked over by a Russian puppet and his minions in the White House.
Who on earth would EVER trust America again? Who would EVER give up nukes for empty promises?
Poor Ukraine. Fucked by friends and foes alike!
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 21,730
You’ve fallen for the show they are projecting, and are missing the real show.Fair enough. On that point i feel the same way
I disagree he is a scam artist. Not that I think that is beyond him. But nothing he is doing politically rings of trying to scam the people.
I do agree he is a narcissist and wont disagree he thinks mostly of himself. But where we disagree, and where I think your analysis breaks down is on what you believe he wants.
I have previously pointed this out. What he wants is adulation and a political legacy. And the only way to achieve this is to do things that convinces the majority of the population that it's in their favor... If you start with an understanding of that premise, everything he is doing makes sense.
He is trying to appeal to the majority as a rule.
Setting up an organization to audit '"Fraud, Waste and Misuse' is something most of the population is for. Even those who hate him... There is no one who doesn't want fraud and waste ended. Sure they may quibble with the process, but the goal is wanted by a majority who isbt profiting from the fraud or waste.
Attempting to half the deficit- Most wants this. You might doubt his ability to do this or disagree on whether the actions he is taking will achieve it but that goal is wanted. Anr the plan of how they intend to attempt to achieve it us no secret. Sure many self acclaimed economic scholars here have concluded it would fail. But unfortunately most Americans aren't self acclaimed scholars, so the best they can do is give it a chance. So we do.
Deportation of illegal. Especially those who are convicted criminals and those whose cases have been adjudicated and removal orders posted... By the way, as of last week, 97% of everyone apprehended, fit that description above. In other words, the Biden administration was simply not following the rule of law by failing pick up and deport people who's Immigration cases had been adjudicated by Immigration Courts. Foggy pay attention!
Again, the majority is for this. Even liberals don't want to live with violent criminals if they don't have to. Many will quibble about the process, and fantasize about the motivations behind following the law, but if there is q wcam here, its that its unlikely that they can round up all those who have committed felonies here ir the ave been adjudicated for removal in his 4 years in office. We are talking over a million people fitting that description.here.
Dismantling DEI is also popular with the majority. Discrimination in a different name is still just discrimination. Everyone recognizes it. And most if they could would rather not have discrimination unde any disguise.
Reducing, cost of production through energy cost reduction also is supported by most. Once the legislature gets going, his tax plan including closing some billionaires loopholes and removing taxes on tips and overtime ( also is a majorly supported).
Banning men from women sports is also supported by most.
These are by and large his promises and plans. I see nothing wrong with the overarching plan.
True, when he shoots from the hip with ideas like Gaza takeover (which i really think is a negotiation tactic) im pissed and worried because that wasn't on the bingo card. Most of what else he is doing though, was. And there are legitimate and majority support for them. Even if the minority intellectuals here and in rhe States disagree.
I am honestly not going to pretend i am as interested in Gaza as most here are. I'm not. I have a general concern for people suffering anywhere and pray for the best and that their plight gets resolved sooner than later with less suffering . But on a personal note I'm more concerned about the Genocide in Cameroun, about Boko Haram kidnapping girls and murdering boys in Northern Nigeria, and the menace of KFR in the South South. These seem to be of greater emotional concern for me than say Gaza or Ukraine. I understand, most in the West are more interested in these 2 conflicts and perhaps for good reason. But im not as invested
I'm sure the way you feel or think about South Cameroun, Boko Haram and K for R should give you an insight into how i feel about Gaza/Ukraine.
Last edited:
Surrender talks... same sort of peace as Chamberlain secured. If you think it would satisfy Putin's territorial ambitions you're naive.One call and so soon into his presidency seems to have began the process, talks are happening. People must be really pissed off that he's managed to start to get things going and now the prospect of peace talks are on the horizon.
I can understand why this would be so.
Oh please. Bigjoe might think you're serious.Still, it’s good that the process has begun.
Look at the geography. Ukraine will have a whole new eastern border to defendFair play to him he sounds like he has finally made a breakthrough with Russia and Ukraine. No one knows what any peace deal may look like and Zelenskyy will have to agree to whatever is on the table.
How can anyone not think this good news other than base it on their hatred of Trump? Any other president or politician did this they would be being praised.
Oh what, you think Putin would stick to a deal?
Actually, the US right is zero. The UN adjudicate such matters.
We all wish that.I do wish I was as clever as you are.
Well, enlighten me CB. Don't leave me in the dark :)You’ve fallen for the show they are projecting OUT, and are missing the real show.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 20,356
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
Does any of this matter? There are loads of examples of countries calling the same bit of water different things. The English Channel for example - I don't think it'll say that on a French map but it's hardly going to cause an international spat. Just another example of Trump trolling the easily triggered. The Mexicans can call it one thing and the US can call it another - nothing changes and it doesn’t matter.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 21,730
The show is the bluster for the media. Lookee here! Oh wow, did you hear this! Aren’t I great? America is being made great again, isn’t it?! Who needs vaccines, or a Dept of Education, or climate change advocacy, or gay rights or, or, or, or…19 Inspector Generals who oversee the work of government to ensure there is no corruption, or laws that stop the receipt or payments of gifts (often called “bribes”) to or from foreign entities.Well, enlighten me CB. Don't leave me in the dark :)
The Republic is being dismantled behind the scenes in ways we have not yet fathomed, because we haven’t run into it in a public way…yet, while everyone is focused on the public plate spinning exhibition!
It does matter. One reason being that they kicked out the press that didn't use the term. One reason being that it isn't America's to rename. One reason being that it's fuckin nuts.Does any of this matter? There are loads of examples of countries calling the same bit of water different things. The English Channel for example - I don't think it'll say that on a French map but it's hardly going to cause an international spat. Just another example of Trump trolling the easily triggered. The Mexicans can call it one thing and the US can call it another - nothing changes and it doesn’t matter.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 20,356
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
Yes, but none I'd that actually matters or changes territorial rights/geography etc. It's just a name - I imagine the Mexicans probably have it printed in Mexican/Spanish on their maps anyway. There are things to be concerned about with Trump but this is just him playing on the hair trigger of the already outraged - essentially a piss take.It does matter. One reason being that they kicked out the press that didn't use the term. One reason being that it isn't America's to rename. One reason being that it's fuckin nuts.
Hopefully you are right but I think it is a sign of very bad things to come.Yes, but none I'd that actually matters or changes territorial rights/geography etc. It's just a name - I imagine the Mexicans probably have it printed in Mexican/Spanish on their maps anyway. There are things to be concerned about with Trump but this is just him playing on the hair trigger of the already outraged - essentially a piss take.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I suppose it’s only right or fair to see how this actually plays out, rather than the current optics. People always said that Putin needed a face-saving off-ramp and it’s possible (although I’d put it no higher than that) that there is more window dressing to this than the reality of the outcome. Think that unlikely though, lamentably.
Sanctions will be the interesting one. My position in recent months on Ukraine has reluctantly evolved to one where military reality probably needs to be faced in terms of territory (at least for now) but that meaningful security guarantees (preferable NATO membership or equivalent protections) need to be afforded to Ukraine going forward. The latter part of that is not rendered impossible by today’s announcements, but mean the responsibility now lies with the rest of NATO and that will come at a significant cost of which there are no excuses for not meeting. The long term cost will be much higher if we do not.
That then substantively leaves the Russian money that was seized and the sanctions - and this is where the rest of NATO still has significant leverage. Accepting the current territorial status quo and no US troops in Ukraine is one thing, because they are a conflation of reality and matters over which those nations do not exercise significant control or influence, but the latter is not the case with sanctions and it will be interesting to see how that plays out. Certainly it’s inconceivable that matters will return to the state of affairs that subsisted three years ago, but it’s how far from that where we end up that will be telling, and crucial.
Russia will not cease to be a threat to the rest of Europe, whatever the outcome of these talks, and imo the sanctions need to be maintained to the max, especially as they are finally starting to work - as evidenced by the increasingly precarious state of the Russian economy. To me, the sanctions in particular represents significant leverage and should be fully exploited.
It will also be interesting to see how any meeting between Trump and Putin is stage managed and Europe’s (and particularly the UK’s) response to that. I’d be especially interested to observe Badenoch’s reaction to that as she would be in an even more invidious position than Starmer on this imo, given Farage’s inevitable response.
Assuming this is the stitch up that most observers fear or expect, then we need to have a mature debate nationally about our future relationship with the US, and to what extent (not if) we uncouple from that. We certainly cannot rely upon them any more like we once could, and this reality can be responded to in various ways; it’s just such a shame that we are hampered from doing that as purposefully as we might wish by our decision to cut ourselves off from our friends and neighbours in Europe. Certainly this situation, on the face of it, will be far more negatively impactful to us as a nation than any of the perceived slights from the Brexit negotiations.
Unlike others on this board, I’m genuinely saddened by this turn of events, because despite its inherent imbalances, I’ve viewed our relationship with the US as a positive thing in the post war years and have enjoyed visiting the US on many occasions. I have, however, come to view the country differently since Covid (which covers, it should be said, the entire currency of the Biden regime and so it isn’t just a recent thing). Its people overall have unquestionably become more selfish, isolationist and churlish in recent years despite having more reason to be grateful for the world around them and outside them than (for example) the people of Ukraine have, or will have for the foreseeable. I’d hit 26/50 states visited by the end of 2019, but have no desire whatsoever to add to that total, or go back for that matter.
It’s a genuine shame, but like the territorial situation in Ukraine, the direction of travel of our relationship with the US is a lamentable function of reality.
Sanctions will be the interesting one. My position in recent months on Ukraine has reluctantly evolved to one where military reality probably needs to be faced in terms of territory (at least for now) but that meaningful security guarantees (preferable NATO membership or equivalent protections) need to be afforded to Ukraine going forward. The latter part of that is not rendered impossible by today’s announcements, but mean the responsibility now lies with the rest of NATO and that will come at a significant cost of which there are no excuses for not meeting. The long term cost will be much higher if we do not.
That then substantively leaves the Russian money that was seized and the sanctions - and this is where the rest of NATO still has significant leverage. Accepting the current territorial status quo and no US troops in Ukraine is one thing, because they are a conflation of reality and matters over which those nations do not exercise significant control or influence, but the latter is not the case with sanctions and it will be interesting to see how that plays out. Certainly it’s inconceivable that matters will return to the state of affairs that subsisted three years ago, but it’s how far from that where we end up that will be telling, and crucial.
Russia will not cease to be a threat to the rest of Europe, whatever the outcome of these talks, and imo the sanctions need to be maintained to the max, especially as they are finally starting to work - as evidenced by the increasingly precarious state of the Russian economy. To me, the sanctions in particular represents significant leverage and should be fully exploited.
It will also be interesting to see how any meeting between Trump and Putin is stage managed and Europe’s (and particularly the UK’s) response to that. I’d be especially interested to observe Badenoch’s reaction to that as she would be in an even more invidious position than Starmer on this imo, given Farage’s inevitable response.
Assuming this is the stitch up that most observers fear or expect, then we need to have a mature debate nationally about our future relationship with the US, and to what extent (not if) we uncouple from that. We certainly cannot rely upon them any more like we once could, and this reality can be responded to in various ways; it’s just such a shame that we are hampered from doing that as purposefully as we might wish by our decision to cut ourselves off from our friends and neighbours in Europe. Certainly this situation, on the face of it, will be far more negatively impactful to us as a nation than any of the perceived slights from the Brexit negotiations.
Unlike others on this board, I’m genuinely saddened by this turn of events, because despite its inherent imbalances, I’ve viewed our relationship with the US as a positive thing in the post war years and have enjoyed visiting the US on many occasions. I have, however, come to view the country differently since Covid (which covers, it should be said, the entire currency of the Biden regime and so it isn’t just a recent thing). Its people overall have unquestionably become more selfish, isolationist and churlish in recent years despite having more reason to be grateful for the world around them and outside them than (for example) the people of Ukraine have, or will have for the foreseeable. I’d hit 26/50 states visited by the end of 2019, but have no desire whatsoever to add to that total, or go back for that matter.
It’s a genuine shame, but like the territorial situation in Ukraine, the direction of travel of our relationship with the US is a lamentable function of reality.
Not sure NATO membership was ever realistic. I've enjoyed visiting Ukraine and want the best for their people, but they're hardly a traditional ally or a well-established democracy. Article 5 protections aren't negotiable. Is there really political will to send young English or German people to die for Ukraine? I think we've seen the answer is no.
It's been said before in these threads, but the US focus on keeping the peace in Europe post-WW2 is not historically normal or really appropriate for a country on the other side of the ocean. China is a far greater threat to us than Russia and we don't have unlimited resources. I think the domestic challenges in the US are now on clear display. Plenty of people who aren't MAGA imbeciles think it's time for Europe to manage Europe.
It's been said before in these threads, but the US focus on keeping the peace in Europe post-WW2 is not historically normal or really appropriate for a country on the other side of the ocean. China is a far greater threat to us than Russia and we don't have unlimited resources. I think the domestic challenges in the US are now on clear display. Plenty of people who aren't MAGA imbeciles think it's time for Europe to manage Europe.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 21,730
Have you actually looked at a French map?Does any of this matter? There are loads of examples of countries calling the same bit of water different things. The English Channel for example - I don't think it'll say that on a French map but it's hardly going to cause an international spat. Just another example of Trump trolling the easily triggered. The Mexicans can call it one thing and the US can call it another - nothing changes and it doesn’t matter.
What other stuff have they renamed?
Trump just steamrolls and repeats a lie over and over and over again, until stupid people accept it as the truth!
In this case, they have told ANY LEGITIMATE NEWS OUTLET that doesn’t recognize the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, they will not be invited to Trump press conferences, and thus be harmed in their effort to exercise freedom of the press.
How would you feel if the only press allowed to cover his events were those outlets that called him Grand Poobah Donald J Trump? Or, had to simply refer to him as Greatest President Ever, Sir Trump? Or, who reported, by Friday, that the 2020 election WAS stolen and they regret not informing their readers earlier?
In short, if the ONLY way to gain access to the President is to advocate and support his lies IN PRINT IN YOUR PUBLICATION, how is this different from Hitler’s control over the press?
I will NEVER call it the Gulf of America. EVER.
And, not to ask an obvious question, “Why is this SO important to him that he is banning media that doesn’t do as he says?”
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 21,730
Putin gives that post a LIKE and TWO thumbs up!Not sure NATO membership was ever realistic. I've enjoyed visiting Ukraine and want the best for their people, but they're hardly a traditional ally or a well-established democracy. Article 5 protections aren't negotiable. Is there really political will to send young English or German people to die for Ukraine? I think we've seen the answer is no.
It's been said before in these threads, but the US focus on keeping the peace in Europe post-WW2 is not historically normal or really appropriate for a country on the other side of the ocean. China is a far greater threat to us than Russia and we don't have unlimited resources. I think the domestic challenges in the US are now on clear display. Plenty of people who aren't MAGA imbeciles think it's time for Europe to manage Europe.
Do they have libraries where you live? Internet maybe?