President Trump

Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Hegseth was picked because he is dumb and easily manipulated. He will do exactly what he is told, and I hope it never comes to it, but I have no doubt he will authorise the use of military force against the American people if asked to by the President.
Click to expand...
I watched a documentary, sorry, movie with Kirsten Dunst in it a few weeks back called Civil War.
Interesting premise in it.
Best of luck to all our American buddies in here.
Play nice, now.
 
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...
The silver lining is that Trump can’t last forever. The next POTUS might not be so isolationist.
Three things we need to see:
1. The democrats getting their act together and becoming a proper opposition with a real alternative platform and, eventually, a top class presidential candidate.
2. The scales falling from the eyes of some Republicans, pushing back against Maga.
3. Unity from the Western democracies. I think a reappraisal of their relationships with the US is inevitable and we all need to hold the Western Alliance together.
 
Dax777 said:
But can you see how brief or unclear answers can be misconstrued as hedging?

I always want people to state clearly where they think its going. That way we can compare what they believed to what the eventual outcomes are.

But the general tendency is for folks to say "this is going to be terrible" "this is clearly a grift" etc.

But im expecting more specifics. I get it that no one can predict the future specifically. But what should we expect at the snd of 4 years?


A President who has failed to attempt or deliver the issues he campaigned on? A President that tricked the country only to stuff his pockets and apparently those of his friends.? The establishment of a Dictatorship? A Kleptocratic Monarchy? A lazy **** who golfs all day?

What exactly are you expecting. Because it is east to retrofit ones pre-existing beliefs into whatever the outcomes are.

So its always good to know what people think before hand. While this doesn't specifically apply to you, there are way too many after-the-fact prognostications going on here these days.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. At best I see a presidency that achieves very little as it is undisciplined and chaotic. At worst, I see serious damage to the Western Alliance and to US democratic institutions and the rule of law.
Where the future lies on that spectrum it is far too early to tell.
But I will keep you informed, Dax!
 
Dax777 said:
But can you see how brief or unclear answers can be misconstrued as hedging?

I always want people to state clearly where they think its going. That way we can compare what they believed to what the eventual outcomes are.

But the general tendency is for folks to say "this is going to be terrible" "this is clearly a grift" etc.

But im expecting more specifics. I get it that no one can predict the future specifically. But what should we expect at the snd of 4 years?


A President who has failed to attempt or deliver the issues he campaigned on? A President that tricked the country only to stuff his pockets and apparently those of his friends.? The establishment of a Dictatorship? A Kleptocratic Monarchy? A lazy **** who golfs all day?

What exactly are you expecting. Because it is east to retrofit ones pre-existing beliefs into whatever the outcomes are.

So its always good to know what people think before hand. While this doesn't specifically apply to you, there are way too many after-the-fact prognostications going on here these days.
Click to expand...
TBH Dax I’ve lost interest with this.
I’ll answer you out of what vestiges of respect I have left for anyone in here. How can I put it, well as you put it in response to me in your own inimitable way,…. Here’s a put down to those of an opposing view, but I’m not necessarily talking about you.

Well briefly, others have covered a lot of what I feel rather than know. I don’t have any influence to change anything in America and don’t have any in-depth knowledge of how your system, which seems universally corrupt to me, operates.
I don’t know how any president whether Dem or Rep can do some of the stuff we’ve seen just since January alone. I just hope your constitution and 3 platforms of government have enough inbuilt safeguards that won’t allow a would be dictator do too much damage.

In short Dax, which I know you love, from my point of view I see Trump as a big admirer of of Putin and I see him doing his best over these 4 years, trying to emulate his power grab and narrative control.
That is the least of it. Whether you lot allow him do this or not is up to you…. America. I can’t forecast that.
If he’s successful, old man or not , I see you having trouble getting rid of him in 4 years.

If he’s successful, then I don’t know where his ambitions will end and how his seemingly brainfart ideas about other parts of the world, will adversely effect the world as a whole.

It’s a flippant comment I know, but if it comes to it I’d rather see an American civil war than a third world war starting in the Middle East and spreading through the Balkans and ending god knows where.

Like I say, what do I know, but I might holiday at home for a while until he’s gone and it all blows over.

Do me a favour. I know your answer already so no need to dissect my reply sentence by sentence. I’ll just take it you disagree and think things are going great.
 
[
But Trump has already said he'd follow the court's rulings.
KS55 said:
Fair enough. At best I see a presidency that achieves very little as it is undisciplined and chaotic. At worst, I see serious damage to the Western Alliance and to US democratic institutions and the rule of law.
Where the future lies on that spectrum it is far too early to tell.
But I will keep you informed, Dax!
Click to expand...

My dude!!! Interesting...

By the way to answer the question in your prior claim, The Trump admin has stated that theyd follow the rulings of the courts.

From what i can see so far, a majority of these cases will rule in favor of the Trump admin. With the exceptions of Birth Rights EO, I haven't seen any one his admin wouldn't win on the merit.

In essence, most of these cases to my naked eye, seem like activist judicial attempts to slow down the legitimate activities of the Executive branch.
 
Dax777 said:
[
But Trump has already said he'd follow the court's rulings.

My dude!!! Interesting...

By the way to answer the question in your prior claim, The Trump admin has stated that theyd follow the rulings of the courts.

From what i can see so far, a majority of these cases will rule in favor of the Trump admin. With the exceptions of Birth Rights EO, I haven't seen any one his admin wouldn't win on the merit.

In essence, most of these cases to my naked eye, seem like activist judicial attempts to slow down the legitimate activities of the Executive branch.
Click to expand...
I think you’ll be disappointed. For example, many civil servants have statutory protections. No court is going to set those at nought. I’m not persuaded by anything they say…..by their deeds shall ye know them.
Btw, those ‘activist’ judges, many were Republican appointments and several have conservative reputations.
 
KS55 said:
I think you’ll be disappointed. For example, both types of civil servants have statutory protections. No court is going to set those at nought. I’m not persuaded by anything they say…..by their deeds shall ye know them.
Btw, those ‘activist’ judges, many were Republican appointments and several have conservative reputations.
Click to expand...
Not several... 2

But fair enough. Lets watch it play out
 
Manc in London said:
I can understand the US being frustrated with countries spending a much lower proportion of GDP. It's hard to read Trump and his acolytes but it may be more about encouraging those spending less than 2% to significantly increase funding for defence. Maybe 5% is the ideal, rather than the target.

I guess governments across the world have to just get through Trump's presidency. With the US being in the grip of a cult that provides a 'home' to those with small 'organs', it's time we looked more towards Europe. To be honest, I would rather we had a close relationship with China than the US, as the Chinese government are measured and pragmatic. :)
Click to expand...
A crackpot like Trump (if Chinese) wouldn't have got anywhere near being President in China.
Compare the lives/careers of Trump and Xi.
 
has he ever talked of nuclear de-escalation? I don't recall that before.
It would certainly save a lot of money, although the arms industry may not be happy!
 
MillionMilesAway said:
has he ever talked of nuclear de-escalation? I don't recall that before.
It would certainly save a lot of money, although the arms industry may not be happy!
Click to expand...
The US arms industry would certainly enjoy a continued conflict in UKR.
 
Koniec said:
The US arms industry would certainly enjoy a continued conflict in UKR.
Click to expand...
And if they lose that, why not try and force European countries to fork out even more US munitions by threatening to leave/not assist other NATO members, if needed.

The European nations need to upscale delivery of its own stock, not rely on being blackmailed by the lunatic regime across the pond.
 
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