President Trump

west didsblue said:
The first step is to ban organisations that don’t go along with the bullshit. If a news organisation goes along with it the next step will be threatening to ban organisations that refuse to promulgate his lies. The ones that do are already favoured so it’s likely to happen. It will only stop when it is a state controlled fully compliant media like in Russia.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I did read that a number of media organisations have now been banned from the White House and 'favoured' media organisations invited in.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
“Why is this SO important to him that he is banning media that doesn’t do as he says?”
Click to expand...

It's not about the Gulf. It's projection of power. To show that he can pick and choose what is reported. To stop an independent press.

He's a crime boss, emulating exactly what Putin did in Russia.
 
oldius said:
Musk's son seems to be a little scamp, doesn't he!
Telling the President of the USA to 'Shut your fucking mouth!' and then, 'You're not the President!'. One suspects he's been listening to family chat.
Click to expand...
The odds on him not turning out to be an utterly malign **** when he grows up are somewhat slim.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
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.
Click to expand...
Sadly agree with this, June will be my last visit to the USA, many places to see in Europe and indeed other parts of the world, the attitude coming from across the pond is shit if I’m honest, if they want isolationism so be it, I’d fuck NATO off with them in it and have a European force and get Ukraine in, us and France have nukes and I’d give Ukraine them straight away, fuck Russia theyre a spent force. America can go fight China for all I care now.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
We use it all the time as it’s one of the chief drivers of weather in the Eastern U.S., destination of many hurricanes, etc.

I’ll be flying over it on Saturday night (Houston-São Paulo) and you can be 100% CERTAIN I will call it the Gulf of Mexico!!
Click to expand...
Out loud in the cabin? The Magastasi might report you.

How long before the FAA demands compiance?

'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four! Stop it, stop it! How can you go on? Four! Four!'
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Five! Five! Five!'
'No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?'
'Four! five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!
 
Dax777 said:
Im not sure why you said this. I don't think i claimed otherwise.

Im not sure i understand the point of these questions... Are you saying i should care more about Gaza than Cameroun or Nigeria because American government is more involved there?
Click to expand...
Well, yes.

Well done on taking more interest in genocides that the USA is not facilitating rather than the one it is.

More generally, does it really not bother you that the rest of the world is appalled by / incredulous at / frightened by / taking the piss out of the USA?
 
Last edited:
Blue Maverick said:
Sadly agree with this, June will be my last visit to the USA, many places to see in Europe and indeed other parts of the world, the attitude coming from across the pond is shit if I’m honest, if they want isolationism so be it, I’d fuck NATO off with them in it and have a European force and get Ukraine in, us and France have nukes and I’d give Ukraine them straight away, fuck Russia theyre a spent force. America can go fight China for all I care now.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. However, if we pulled from NATO then only the French would have nukes
 
Blue Maverick said:
Sadly agree with this, June will be my last visit to the USA, many places to see in Europe and indeed other parts of the world, the attitude coming from across the pond is shit if I’m honest, if they want isolationism so be it, I’d fuck NATO off with them in it and have a European force and get Ukraine in, us and France have nukes and I’d give Ukraine them straight away, fuck Russia theyre a spent force. America can go fight China for all I care now.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s pretty much how I feel mate. Let’s not forget this was a symbiotic relationship and the only time Article 5 was ever invoked was after 9/11, which entailed by necessity European soldiers sacrificing their lives after the US was attacked. Notable how easily that is forgotten even though it was this century.

The relationship has required, again by necessity, a degree of subservience on our part, and I expect our bending of the knee was founded on an expectation that the US would always reciprocate when we were attacked or under serious threat thereto.

That’s plainly no longer the case, and given that we absolutely need to recalibrate our relationship accordingly. Otherwise, what does it say about us as a nation? Isn’t that what taking back control was supposed to enable us to do?
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
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.
Click to expand...
But a journalist that doesn’t call it America won’t be entertained.
 
Trump renaming it the Gulf of America, and insisting everyone follows, is the political equivalent of Liverpool fans who’ve never been to Anfield going on about empty seats at the Etihad.

It’s comical, pitiful and displays pathological levels of insecurity. It’s actually beyond parody.

Unbelievable they’ve elected this utter clown for a second time.
 
mosssideblue said:
Totally agree. However, if we pulled from NATO then only the French would have nukes
Click to expand...
Well I asked this before and was told Trident was ours and didn’t need permission from USA or is that wrong?
Upon further reading you are right, I guess we ask the French for them instead, seems the USA has everyone over a barrel with stuff, time to start cutting ties I think and move a lot closer to Europe.
 
How did Trident come about?

  • The UK government negotiated with the US to purchase Trident I missiles in the 1980s.
  • In 1982, Margaret Thatcher negotiated with President Reagan to purchase Trident II missiles.
  • The US manufactures the missiles, while the UK manufactures the warheads.
 
Blue Maverick said:
Sadly agree with this, June will be my last visit to the USA, many places to see in Europe and indeed other parts of the world, the attitude coming from across the pond is shit if I’m honest, if they want isolationism so be it, I’d fuck NATO off with them in it and have a European force and get Ukraine in, us and France have nukes and I’d give Ukraine them straight away, fuck Russia theyre a spent force. America can go fight China for all I care now.
Click to expand...

arrogance of the new regime personified - they can go fuck themselves and their aircraft carriers and they can take their personnel out of our country as this makes it clear we just cannot rely on them in the manner we once could

 
bluethrunthru said:
arrogance of the new regime personified - they can go fuck themselves and their aircraft carriers and they can take their personnel out of our country as this makes it clear we just cannot rely on them in the manner we once could

Click to expand...

Watched it this morning. What an arrogant and ignorant **** he is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top