• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Second Term

Elon Says

Elon Musk
@elonmusk

How much are they paying you, Schiffty?

Quote
Adam Schiff
@SenAdamSchiff
Tonight I'll be holding the Senate floor and doing everything I can to stop RFK Jr.'s nomination.
If you're awake, tune in at 1am ET here, or on YouTube.
Click to expand...
 
Safe-Keeper said:
To the best of my knowledge, Chamberlain also ran a massive rearmament program while trying to come to an agreement with Hitler. Drumpf is just a puppet wagging his tail for Daddy putin.
Click to expand...
That was mostly after and largely focused on air defence. The army was left to make do until after Prague.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
One thing that is also clear now is that any agreement with the US is not worth the paper it is written on. At any point all their international agreements can be ripped up at the whim of a single person. There are a few other countries with similar track records. Russia. Iran. Afghanistan.
Click to expand...
This canard again.

Agreements made by the president are not binding on future administrations, nor on the nation. Any agreement that has not been ratified by Congress can always be tossed out by the next President, and many are. The only reason progressives pretend otherwise is so that they can blame Trump for Biden's decision to follow through with an Afghanistan withdrawal timeline he could easily have torn up and replaced with something more sensible.
 
theprestige said:
This canard again.

Agreements made by the president are not binding on future administrations, nor on the nation. Any agreement that has not been ratified by Congress can always be tossed out by the next President, and many are. The only reason progressives pretend otherwise is so that they can blame Trump for Biden's decision to follow through with an Afghanistan withdrawal timeline he could easily have torn up and replaced with something more sensible.
Click to expand...


This canard again... bwahahahahaha


-
 
theprestige said:
This canard again.

Agreements made by the president are not binding on future administrations, nor on the nation. Any agreement that has not been ratified by Congress can always be tossed out by the next President, and many are. The only reason progressives pretend otherwise is so that they can blame Trump for Biden's decision to follow through with an Afghanistan withdrawal timeline he could easily have torn up and replaced with something more sensible.
Click to expand...
Sure, the unilateral withdrawal from most international organizations with no warning, the renaming of international landmarks, ripping up the trade agreement with Mexico and Canada from the Trump1 administration etc, show clearly the US can be fully trusted to commit to any agreement longer than 2 years.
 
I really like the open acknowledgement that the Ukraine is not a concern of the U.S. and any treaty negotiated under U.S. auspices will not have the U.S. guarantee the resulting treaty but leave the Ukraine twisting in the wind so to speak. Just why would the Ukraine accept such a situation?

Given Trump's apparent attitude it would seem, that the following is likely: (Hopefully this won't happen.)

A), Trump and Putin will negotiate a "deal" and leave the Ukraine largely out of the process.

B), They will present Ukraine with it. The agreement will allow Russia to retain all or nearly all of the territory conquered. Ukraine will be bared from joining NATO, no compensation of any kind will be given the Ukraine for Putin's blatant and unjustified aggression. This will of course look very much like an obvious giving in to naked aggression and a violation of International Law. (But who cares about that?!)

C), The Ukraine will likely reject such a dictated capitulation.

D), Trump will then blame the Ukraine and all U.S. assistance will stop.

E), Putin will be elated and continue the war.

F), If Europe tries to form a military alliance to protect the Ukraine. Putin will scream about aggression, interference and try to pressure Trump to get Europe to back off. If Putin doesn't want the Ukraine to join NATO, he almost certainly will not want the Ukraine in a military alliance with Europe and probably complain to Trump about it. Trump could either ignore the whine or tell the Europeans to stop upsetting Putin. I am not taking the second response has unlikely.

G), Trump should know by now that Putin almost certainly will not want a Ukraine closely linked by Military ties to Europe.

H), If Europe massively steps up aid to the Ukraine in response to the U.S. shutting off aid. Putin will whine about that and scream about aggression etc. And since Putin has used North Korean Troops, It is possible that one or more European country will send large numbers of troops. If that happens Putin will continue to whine and Trump if he is a fool will talk about how bad it is that Europe is upsetting Putin. (Hopefully he won't do this.)

I), If the capitulation happens. Europe will feel, rightly, that it cannot rely on the U.S. Putin will then more than ever be perceived as a threat to other European nations, greatly increasing tensions, and distrust. to say nothing of European paranoia about Russia. I really doubt the Baltic states will feel very safe from Russia for example. And of course strains within NATO will be seriously increased.

J), Worst case scenario. The Ukraine after capitulation falls apart and is absorbed into a new Russian Empire, complete with russification, arrest of dissidents etc. And Trump simply shrugs and says in so many words "Who cares". Meanwhile Putin's corrupt and brutal rule of Russia as been massively strengthened.

Of course Trump could simply tell Putin that if he wants the conquered territory he has to accept the Ukraine entering NATO. If he doesn't well tough cookies. If the Ukraine has to accept the loss of territory Putin in my opinion as a bare minimum has to accept the Ukraine joining NATO. (And while we at it lets' give Ukraine some nuclear missiles.)
 
theprestige said:
This canard again.

Agreements made by the president are not binding on future administrations, nor on the nation. Any agreement that has not been ratified by Congress can always be tossed out by the next President, and many are. The only reason progressives pretend otherwise is so that they can blame Trump for Biden's decision to follow through with an Afghanistan withdrawal timeline he could easily have torn up and replaced with something more sensible.
Click to expand...
Well, we had been in Afghanistan for about twenty years and only managed to create a regime that collapsed at about the rate that the Taliban could drive in pickup trucks to places and announce that they were in charge, so I am not sure what a sensible timeline would be.

Everyone likes to trash Biden for withdrawing from Afghanistan the "wrong" way. Nobody likes to mention that there was no "right" way to withdraw.
 
theprestige said:
This canard again.

Agreements made by the president are not binding on future administrations, nor on the nation. Any agreement that has not been ratified by Congress can always be tossed out by the next President, and many are. The only reason progressives pretend otherwise is so that they can blame Trump for Biden's decision to follow through with an Afghanistan withdrawal timeline he could easily have torn up and replaced with something more sensible.
Click to expand...

You do realize that doing so does damage to the idea that agreements with the U.S. can be trusted to be kept.

Further the agreement that Trump made back in the day were modifications of the Free Trade Agreement with both Mexico and Canada. What he is doing with those executive orders is violating those Treaties. The justification he gives for doing so is specious crap.

(I found the Energy Emergency stuff to be hilarious.)

Do you think an utterly unnecessary trade war is a good idea?

What do you think about the Executive Order attacking Birthright citizenship? A clear violation of the Constitution. Which Trump and his advisors would know well ahead of time but they did it anyway?
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Sure, the unilateral withdrawal from most international organizations with no warning, the renaming of international landmarks, ripping up the trade agreement with Mexico and Canada from the Trump1 administration etc, show clearly the US can be fully trusted to commit to any agreement longer than 2 years.
Click to expand...
Basically, every other nation should treat the US as if it suffers from multiple personality disorder on a four year cycle.
 
Pacal said:
I really like the open acknowledgement that the Ukraine is not a concern of the U.S.
Click to expand...
It's not that it's not a concern for us, it's that it's more of a concern for Europe than for us, and so Europe should shoulder most of the burden of dealing with it. And they aren't stepping up to the plate like they should, in part because they didn't spend on defense like the US (including Trump) has been telling them to for decades, and often still don't want to.
 
Pacal said:
You do realize that doing so does damage to the idea that agreements with the U.S. can be trusted to be kept.
Click to expand...
Yes. It's a bad idea and should be deprecated.

Also, I'm pretty sure that other world leaders and pundits are fully aware that promises made by one US administration are only as good as that administration's tenure. Even if they sometimes pretend ignorance and outrage for whatever reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom