Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The day the Europe and world changed – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,318
edited February 18 in General
The day the Europe and world changed – politicalbetting.com

Bombshell speech from US secretary of defence:-stark strategic realities prevent US from being primarily focused on the security of Europe.-US troops wont be part of post ceasefire deterrence force in Ukraine-any nato forces that are sent wont have Nato Article 5 protection

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,870
    Wow, first?
  • Second like Labour
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,768
    The dope smoking teacher being paraded by Trump yesterday was released in an ‘exchange’ with Putin. When asked what was actually exchanged Trump said ‘not much’.
    Is this the not much?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,419
    edited February 12
    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,515
    I seem to remember some criticism for suggesting that NATO would not survive the Trump Presidency. But I must admit I did not foresee it not lasting the first month.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,502
    US inflation up to 3%. The tariffs aren't even in force yet. Probably not long before Trump goes after Fed independence tbh.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,870
    edited February 12
    rkrkrk said:

    US inflation up to 3%. The tariffs aren't even in force yet. Probably not long before Trump goes after Fed independence tbh.

    Inevitable, and in itself an inflationary move.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068
    Is it a bombshell ?
    Seems more of a restatement of what Trump has been saying for a while.

    I think everyone got carried away with the talk about the minerals deal. That was more Zelensky negotiating to keep the weapons supply going than any expectation of US guarantees.

    But in any event, the terms of debate are clarified in adjacent of any negotiations. Which at least protects us from an unexpected betrayal.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,870
    edited February 12
    “No return to 2014 borders” means that the U.S. now accepts the annexation of Crimea.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554
    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595
    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    None of this is new; it has been in Trump's words and the GOP's actions for ages.

    Do I do wonder why some intelligent people have tried to sell this line.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,999

    The dope smoking teacher being paraded by Trump yesterday was released in an ‘exchange’ with Putin. When asked what was actually exchanged Trump said ‘not much’.
    Is this the not much?

    Hopefully he got the golden shower kompromat photos too, for total capitulation to Putin.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    What a load of bollocks
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 381
    Seems that Trump is about to repeat the mistake, if it was a mistake, from the last time.

    Oligarchs and Vulture Capitalists succeed where there is ongoing destruction of norms and the status quo.

    https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/lessons-minsk-deal-breaking-cycle-russias-war-ukraine
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,867
    If he's to have any chance of returning to front-line politics at all, Boris needs to issue a clarification.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,994
    edited February 12

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    None of this is new; it has been in Trump's words and the GOP's actions for ages.

    Do I do wonder why some intelligent people have tried to sell this line.

    It's been effectively codified today by the American SecDef, that's why I said this is the tempest long foretold.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068

    The dope smoking teacher being paraded by Trump yesterday was released in an ‘exchange’ with Putin. When asked what was actually exchanged Trump said ‘not much’.
    Is this the not much?

    In his view, clearly.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 755

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,104

    If he's to have any chance of returning to front-line politics at all, Boris needs to issue a clarification.

    I'd be very, very surprised if Boris returned to front-line politics.
  • WinchyWinchy Posts: 108
    Where NATO is concerned, eyes should be on Jordan.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,104
    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    I'm not sure it's a good idea to expect coherence from the this US Administration.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,845
    The UK is never going to increase defence spending or fund it properly.

    It'd require too many painful choices, and the electorate would rather spend more on pensions, the NHS and social welfare and will punish politicians who do anything else.
  • WinchyWinchy Posts: 108
    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    The Thucydidean trap?

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554
    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595
    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Or the statements from Trump himself? When you are dealing with someone like Putin, giving him words that console him do not make pace more likeyl.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,181
    That's the end of Reeves's fiscal rule then.

    We have to start spending far more on defence.


  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,994
    edited February 12
    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    That's my subtle self.

    I was going to use the sort of language that normally gets you banned from PB.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Putin has repeatedly *not* used that justification for the war.

    But his followers have, and it has been taken up by (at best) appeaser shits in the west. Such as Trump, who has mentioned it.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,922

    That's the end of Reeves's fiscal rule then.

    We have to start spending far more on defence.


    During the Cold War, with the US backing Europe, it was more than double current % of GDP.

    Without the US, probably quadruple the current rate, would be required to build up capability, for decades.

    More than 10%
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    On topic, OUTLANDER season 7 manages to be one of the most moving yet. Absolute ludicrous nonsense with more holes than the A11, and yet kinda genius

    Vanishingly few dramas maintain this quality past 4 or even 5 seasons. The only comparison is probably Grays Anatomy but Outlander has a harder job because it cannot keep churning characters in and out and it has a fiendish time travel scheme to maintain

    Chapeau chapeau chapeau
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,423

    As a historian it amazes me that for so many people the lessons about appeasement appear to have either been forgotten or never been learned.

    Is that entirely fair? I am not sure who you are addressing, but consistently the UK voter has voted for NATO + the independent nuclear deterrent; and it is not easy to work out what better plan the UK could have had to resist appeasement within our sphere of influence. To this day direct military attacks by another state have not been made on NATO ground. And it is not clear what further plan we could have in the cupboard to be implemented the moment the USA decides that it is leaving the plan.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,633
    Apparent;y not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,553
    edited February 12
    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,515
    Winchy said:

    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    The Thucydidean trap?

    Possibly but I think its a bit simpler than that. Taiwan produces 92% of the worlds semi conductors from the smallest to AI chips. As long as that remains even close to being true protecting Taiwan is America's primary military purpose. Of course, if I was Taiwanese I would be slightly concerned about what the position will be when American production driven by their CHIPS Act gets up to speed.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/katharinabuchholz/2023/01/13/advanced-microchip-production-relies-on-taiwan/
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Putin has repeatedly *not* used that justification for the war.

    But his followers have, and it has been taken up by (at best) appeaser shits in the west. Such as Trump, who has mentioned it.
    2021 - "President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia would be forced to act if its "red lines" on Ukraine were crossed by NATO, saying Moscow would view the deployment of certain offensive missile capabilities on Ukrainian soil as a trigger."

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/stocks/putin-warns-russia-will-act-if-nato-crosses-its-red-lines-ukraine-2021-11-30/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,515
    edited February 12
    Scott_xP said:

    Apparent;y not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1

    They're giving it to us?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,999

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Don't be ridiculous. The joining NATO figleaf barely covered his bollocks.

    Putin has spelled it out to us all, including you, me, Trump and Hegseth that he is angling for a Soviet era map of Europe for Greater Russia.

    Trying to sell the Hegseth speech as anything other than a capitulation or simple treachery to ones allies is disingenuous contempt.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Apparent;y not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1

    Their giving it to us?
    A timeshare with France.
  • Winchy said:

    Where NATO is concerned, eyes should be on Jordan.

    Why? What's Katie Price done now?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,419

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    No it doesn't. Putin doesn't *need* an excuse. The article wot I wrote in 2022 about the Ukraine invasion pointed out that it was part of a pattern of behaviour caused by Putin's desire to secure Russia's borders and influence before he dies.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,768
    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554
    viewcode said:

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    No it doesn't. Putin doesn't *need* an excuse. The article wot I wrote in 2022 about the Ukraine invasion pointed out that it was part of a pattern of behaviour caused by Putin's desire to secure Russia's borders and influence before he dies.
    If he doesn't need excuses, why does he use so many of them? He's not straightforward about it like Trump.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,099

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Apparent;y not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1

    Their giving it to us?
    A timeshare with France.
    And the Netherlands. This could get confusing!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,870

    The UK is never going to increase defence spending or fund it properly.

    It'd require too many painful choices, and the electorate would rather spend more on pensions, the NHS and social welfare and will punish politicians who do anything else.

    This is what political leadership if for.
    However I don’t really think there’s been a conscious attempt to lead the British public for many years.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,099
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Apparent;y not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1

    Their giving it to us?
    That's delightfully ambiguous depending on whether we believe you're lazy* with capitalisation of country name abbreviations

    *afterall, 'their' suggests the possibility of typos auto-correct :wink:
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,181

    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Putin has repeatedly *not* used that justification for the war.

    But his followers have, and it has been taken up by (at best) appeaser shits in the west. Such as Trump, who has mentioned it.
    2021 - "President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia would be forced to act if its "red lines" on Ukraine were crossed by NATO, saying Moscow would view the deployment of certain offensive missile capabilities on Ukrainian soil as a trigger."

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/stocks/putin-warns-russia-will-act-if-nato-crosses-its-red-lines-ukraine-2021-11-30/
    You need to see the way Russia and Putin works.

    They spit out as many different lines as possible, designed to confuse and appeal to as many people as possible.

    We saw this with MH17, where a new line came out of the Kremlin daily, and they were slurped up by idiots and repeated by shills daily - however obviously contradictory those lines were.

    On many occasions - e.g. the Carlson 'interview' - he fails to mention NATO expansion as a reason for the war.

    Putin is a fascist imperialist. That's all you need to know.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,515

    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
    Russia remains a nuclear threat. For as long as that is the case we need Trident or an equivalent. Indeed, now we can no longer rely upon the US nuclear umbrella, we need it even more.
  • DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
    It’s not a sock, and importantly in the bit of David’s post you’ve highlighted, Putin remains a nuclear threat.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595


    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c

    It isn't even appeasement. It's surrender.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,632
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,502
    Politically, I think there might be an opportunity for Starmer on defence.
    Farage is weak on this issue, you can call him a Putin appeaser.
    The Tories obviously presided over a long period of defence cuts.

  • Test:


  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Your casuistry is on fine form today.
  • Nigelb said:

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Your casuistry is on fine form today.
    He’s going to put out his back with all these contortions.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,088

    As a historian it amazes me that for so many people the lessons about appeasement appear to have either been forgotten or never been learned.

    Appeasement gets a bad reputation but was entirely understandable. The politicians of the day had, for the most part, fought in the first war, or at least had close family that did. Even the UK, who got of relatively lightly, had around 850,000 dead as a result. There was no appetite in the UK for fighting another war.

    And many of Germanies demands were not unreasonable. I think history judges Versailles to have been overly harsh on the German nation - the war guilt stuff etc. (Not to say that the Germans would not have been equally bad winners - Brest Litovsk shows that. Drang nach osten didn't start in 1933 after all). Remilitarising your own territory? Fine. Actually having an air force and expanded military? Ok. Re-integrating ethnice Germans into the Reich - well self determination ought to apply to all really.

    And then in reality appeasement bought time. Time to build spitfire factories and design the Lancaster. And also by failing, it gave the causus belli - Hitler said 1938 was the end and he lied. So now we must fight.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,768
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
    Russia remains a nuclear threat. For as long as that is the case we need Trident or an equivalent. Indeed, now we can no longer rely upon the US nuclear umbrella, we need it even more.
    Talk me through the scenario where a conventionally militarily toothless Putin considers taking out London with a Satan II?
    I’d also suggest using Trident is de facto relying on the US nuclear umbrella. Developing our own strategic nukes might be at least coherent (if still bonkers).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
    Russia remains a nuclear threat. For as long as that is the case we need Trident or an equivalent. Indeed, now we can no longer rely upon the US nuclear umbrella, we need it even more.
    Talk me through the scenario where a conventionally militarily toothless Putin considers taking out London with a Satan II?
    I’d also suggest using Trident is de facto relying on the US nuclear umbrella. Developing our own strategic nukes might be at least coherent (if still bonkers).
    I agree, I think the UK now needs to develop a truly independent deterrent. But we will still need to park it at Faslane, soz boz
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068
    Scott_xP said:

    Apparently not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1

    No, the gentleman absolutely is.
  • There was an article in the WSJ or WaPo in late 2023 which said how he hated Biden more than Reagan all because of Biden’s visit to Kyiv in 2023.

    Putin had expected to walk around Kyiv being adulated but Biden got there before him but the humiliation that he never recovered from was just before the visit Lloyd Austin ringing up his counterpart in Russia and telling them to pause attacks for the visit of Biden or it would be seen as an attack of war.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,088
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    My suspicion (and pthers on here) is that Hamas don't actually have any more living hostages, at which point they need to fess up or face the consequences.

    And yes - pity the Gazans trapped under a fanatical ruling power in the face of a mighty conquering army. Its 1945 all over again and the Russian Guards are marching on Berlin.
  • Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Putin has repeatedly *not* used that justification for the war.

    But his followers have, and it has been taken up by (at best) appeaser shits in the west. Such as Trump, who has mentioned it.
    2021 - "President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia would be forced to act if its "red lines" on Ukraine were crossed by NATO, saying Moscow would view the deployment of certain offensive missile capabilities on Ukrainian soil as a trigger."

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/stocks/putin-warns-russia-will-act-if-nato-crosses-its-red-lines-ukraine-2021-11-30/
    You need to see the way Russia and Putin works.

    They spit out as many different lines as possible, designed to confuse and appeal to as many people as possible.

    We saw this with MH17, where a new line came out of the Kremlin daily, and they were slurped up by idiots and repeated by shills daily - however obviously contradictory those lines were.

    On many occasions - e.g. the Carlson 'interview' - he fails to mention NATO expansion as a reason for the war.

    Putin is a fascist imperialist. That's all you need to know.
    If it's OK for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to be part of NATO, why not Ukraine?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068

    viewcode said:

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    No it doesn't. Putin doesn't *need* an excuse. The article wot I wrote in 2022 about the Ukraine invasion pointed out that it was part of a pattern of behaviour caused by Putin's desire to secure Russia's borders and influence before he dies.
    If he doesn't need excuses, why does he use so many of them? He's not straightforward about it like Trump.
    Hahahahaha

    They are both bullshitters of the first order.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    MaxPB said:

    Trump has telegraphed this since 2016, we've had 8 years to increase defence spending and blister European militaries but we chose to do nothing in Western Europe and preferred to spend money on the endless money pit of old people and healthcare.

    Yep. We have to muscle up. Fuck the old and the fat

    We need to let them die and get on with protecting the young. But quid pro quo we need to teach the young WHY Britain and the west and freedom is worth protecting. Send em all back to school and smack some patriotism into them. Toughen them up by sending them for away days to special “watch fat and old people die” camps where they can peer through small Perspex slits into gated enclosures where fat and old people die clutching their fucking PlayStations then comes the mass brutalizing of the lawyers
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554

    There was an article in the WSJ or WaPo in late 2023 which said how he hated Biden more than Reagan all because of Biden’s visit to Kyiv in 2023.

    Putin had expected to walk around Kyiv being adulated but Biden got there before him but the humiliation that he never recovered from was just before the visit Lloyd Austin ringing up his counterpart in Russia and telling them to pause attacks for the visit of Biden or it would be seen as an attack of war.

    That also explains the vitriol directed at our own Boris Johnson by Russia. Truly the West was lucky to have him in power at that time instead of someone like Cameron who previously offered Putin a way to legitimate his conquests with a 'referendum'.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    Perhaps I did 5 minutes too long at the gym
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,419

    viewcode said:

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    No it doesn't. Putin doesn't *need* an excuse. The article wot I wrote in 2022 about the Ukraine invasion pointed out that it was part of a pattern of behaviour caused by Putin's desire to secure Russia's borders and influence before he dies.
    If he doesn't need excuses, why does he use so many of them? He's not straightforward about it like Trump.
    The Russians are brutal realists and use language to fulfil goals or serve a strategic purpose, not to disseminate facts. In this sense Russia never lies nor tells the truth, instead applying that form of words necessary to achieve a goal. Putin's words keep the Orthodox Church onside and allow him to apply a veneer of legality to his actions, thereby enabling him to claim that he has kept his obligations under Russian and international law.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,419
    MaxPB said:

    Trump has telegraphed this since 2016, we've had 8 years to increase defence spending and blister European militaries but we chose to do nothing in Western Europe and preferred to spend money on the endless money pit of old people and healthcare.

    This is because old and sick people have votes. Lots of votes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    My suspicion (and pthers on here) is that Hamas don't actually have any more living hostages, at which point they need to fess up or face the consequences.

    And yes - pity the Gazans trapped under a fanatical ruling power in the face of a mighty conquering army. Its 1945 all over again and the Russian Guards are marching on Berlin.
    Israel is going to seize the moment and enact a Final Solution to the Palestinian problem

    Grim, ironic, bleak, hideously logical
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,901


    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c

    Her summation:

    "Between the tariffs, the idiotic threats to Canadian and Danish sovereignty, the destruction of USAID, and the undermining of NATO, it's hard to see what the Trump administration would have done differently in their first 2 weeks if their aim were to destroy US power and global influence."
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,768
    Leon said:

    Perhaps I did 5 minutes too long at the gym

    The Heydrich hernia popped out again?
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
    Russia remains a nuclear threat. For as long as that is the case we need Trident or an equivalent. Indeed, now we can no longer rely upon the US nuclear umbrella, we need it even more.
    Indeed. The UK and French nuclear deterrents are more important than ever given Trump has zero interest in using US nukes to protect Europe.

    Also, it can't be ignored that cancelling the Dreadnought class SSBNs would be an industrial catastrophe. It's taken decades and billions of pounds to build BAE's yard at Barrow into one of the best nuclear submarine production facilities in the world. Killing the Dreadnoughts would destroy all that work and also throw the AUKUS partnership into chaos.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,768
    edited February 12

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    My suspicion (and pthers on here) is that Hamas don't actually have any more living hostages, at which point they need to fess up or face the consequences.

    And yes - pity the Gazans trapped under a fanatical ruling power in the face of a mighty conquering army. Its 1945 all over again and the Russian Guards are marching on Berlin.
    Isn’t the ceasefire deal based on hostages being returned dead and alive?
    Though deal is obviously a fluid term in the circumstances.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417

    Leon said:

    Perhaps I did 5 minutes too long at the gym

    The Heydrich hernia popped out again?
    Possibly

    Even as I wrote “we need to send fat and old people to special camps where they die in agony in front of shocked schoolchildren” I thought, hmm, maybe I could have skipped that second session with the kettlebell

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,687


    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c

    Her summation:

    "Between the tariffs, the idiotic threats to Canadian and Danish sovereignty, the destruction of USAID, and the undermining of NATO, it's hard to see what the Trump administration would have done differently in their first 2 weeks if their aim were to destroy US power and global influence."
    More accurately I would suggest it is not destroying US power it is mostly shifting it from the US state to US oligarchs alongside some destruction. Many tens of billions will be made with US foreign policy up for sale without scruples. In the end the broligarchs will rule as emperors.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417


    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c

    Her summation:

    "Between the tariffs, the idiotic threats to Canadian and Danish sovereignty, the destruction of USAID, and the undermining of NATO, it's hard to see what the Trump administration would have done differently in their first 2 weeks if their aim were to destroy US power and global influence."
    More accurately I would suggest it is not destroying US power it is mostly shifting it from the US state to US oligarchs alongside some destruction. Many tens of billions will be made with US foreign policy up for sale without scruples. In the end the broligarchs will rule as emperors.
    That’s actually a brilliant analogy which I might steal. America is moving from Roman Republic to Roman Empire
  • WinchyWinchy Posts: 108
    edited February 12
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    My suspicion (and pthers on here) is that Hamas don't actually have any more living hostages, at which point they need to fess up or face the consequences.

    And yes - pity the Gazans trapped under a fanatical ruling power in the face of a mighty conquering army. Its 1945 all over again and the Russian Guards are marching on Berlin.
    Israel is going to seize the moment and enact a Final Solution to the Palestinian problem

    Grim, ironic, bleak, hideously logical
    It's not logical - hatred never is - but yes, it looks like they will try. All that was missing from Trump's words, so eagerly welcomed by Netanyahu, about transferring the population "someplace else", and levelling the site and beginning again, was the phrase "Final Solution".

    The Israelis are upping the heat on the West Bank too, and to a lesser extent in Jerusalem...as NATO sets up shop in Jordan. Can't have a FS that's Gaza-only.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,209
    viewcode said:

    MaxPB said:

    Trump has telegraphed this since 2016, we've had 8 years to increase defence spending and blister European militaries but we chose to do nothing in Western Europe and preferred to spend money on the endless money pit of old people and healthcare.

    This is because old and sick people have votes. Lots of votes.
    Never mind, the votes won't be needed in the incoming system of governance.

    I believe our current system will soon be supseded.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,794

    Stereodog said:

    viewcode said:

    "Anybody who thought Trump over Biden/Harris would be better for Ukraine should permanently wear a dunce cap."

    :):):):)

    Trump has lifted the ban on using western weapons to strike long-range targets inside Russia. He’s making the right moves to increase the pressure on Putin.
    Perhaps you'd be able to explain how the statements above from Hegseth increases the pressure on Putin?
    Putin uses the supposed threat of Ukraine joining NATO to justify his war. If that justification is taken away, it increases the pressure on him to end.
    Don't be ridiculous. The joining NATO figleaf barely covered his bollocks.

    Putin has spelled it out to us all, including you, me, Trump and Hegseth that he is angling for a Soviet era map of Europe for Greater Russia.

    Trying to sell the Hegseth speech as anything other than a capitulation or simple treachery to ones allies is disingenuous contempt.
    Why bother? WilliamGlenn is just a Neonazi Putin-supporting troll. His "arguments" are so transparently bollocks they cannot possibly be sincere
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,088
    AnneJGP said:

    viewcode said:

    MaxPB said:

    Trump has telegraphed this since 2016, we've had 8 years to increase defence spending and blister European militaries but we chose to do nothing in Western Europe and preferred to spend money on the endless money pit of old people and healthcare.

    This is because old and sick people have votes. Lots of votes.
    Never mind, the votes won't be needed in the incoming system of governance.

    I believe our current system will soon be supseded.
    You think AV is finally having its day?
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,892
    Chill everyone, it’s just another shakedown.

    We need a ceasefire in Gaza so we can empty it and build lots of beachfront Trump resorts at the US taxpayer’s and Palestinians’ expense.

    We could support Ukraine but we would really need all the minerals in the ground there and all the rebuilding contracts.

    Facebook needs to get back in the good books, what’s that you say, a $25million payout to Trump to apologise for banning him? All good now.

    US won’t allow NATO protection to any peacekeeping force? Well maybe if NATO states were to buy exclusively US weapons and pay for US intelligence etc etc.

    The thing is, Europe has had ages to build its own defence capability but we were all to smug about our welfare states and laughing at the fat uncultured Americans whilst hiding behind them whenever another big boy was out bullying.

    It’s lovely that Germany is so perfect, that France has such amazing roads and rail and they get loads of money per child, wonderful how Spain does fuck all but is delightfully developed these days, beautiful public spaces paid for by the state, lovely municipal buy-outs of stadiums at exaggerated values to help football teams. The UK has been able to love sneering how we have “Our NHS”.

    Europe needs to start chipping in for British and French carrier groups with money or coordinated support ships and planes and contribute to the nuclear deterrent that they are happy to one day benefit from. Countries should be given responsibilities based on abilities and geography. Ireland needs to stop being a smug self righteous crap hole and arm up.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,553

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The language is somewhat less diplomatic but the message is the same as it has been since Obama. The US is much more interested in the Pacific than they are in Europe. China, their only real rival, is in the Pacific as are most of the world's most dynamic economies. That is where history is happening.

    Europe is a (fairly wealthy) backwater. The main strategic threat is Russia which has been destroyed as a conventional threat thanks to the blithering incompetence of Putin. I really wouldn't fancy Russia's chances against Poland in a conventional war at this point, let alone western Europe. Within 10 years it won't even be close.

    The great game has moved on. To be honest, that is not necessarily a bad thing for a continent that has seen far more than its fair share of wars.

    Cool.
    Does that mean we can get rid of that rather pitiful & expensive sock down the British trousers Trident, or do you think it’s only Faslane that’s preventing Putin from first striking perfidious Albion?
    Russia remains a nuclear threat. For as long as that is the case we need Trident or an equivalent. Indeed, now we can no longer rely upon the US nuclear umbrella, we need it even more.
    Talk me through the scenario where a conventionally militarily toothless Putin considers taking out London with a Satan II?
    I’d also suggest using Trident is de facto relying on the US nuclear umbrella. Developing our own strategic nukes might be at least coherent (if still bonkers).
    France has its own strategic nukes of course already
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    Winchy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    My suspicion (and pthers on here) is that Hamas don't actually have any more living hostages, at which point they need to fess up or face the consequences.

    And yes - pity the Gazans trapped under a fanatical ruling power in the face of a mighty conquering army. Its 1945 all over again and the Russian Guards are marching on Berlin.
    Israel is going to seize the moment and enact a Final Solution to the Palestinian problem

    Grim, ironic, bleak, hideously logical
    It's not logical - hatred never is - but yes, it looks like they will try. All that was missing from Trump's words, so eagerly welcomed by Netanyahu, about transferring the population "someplace else", and levelling the site and beginning again, was the phrase "Final Solution".

    The Israelis are upping the heat on the West Bank too, and to a lesser extent in Jerusalem...as NATO sets up shop in Jordan. Can't have a FS that's Gaza-only.
    It is absolutely logical, indeed - if I were Israeli - this is what I would want to happen

    October 7 made it clear that Hamas, the Gazans, the Palestinians, etc, can never be trusted with a 2 state solution (yes yes, history). They tried to rape murder kidnap and mutilate as many Jews as possible JUST FOR BEING JEWS. And then they boasted “we will do this again and again forever”. Given its history as a state born of the Holocaust, Israel cannot accept this, not now, not any longer

    But what can they do about it? The only real answer is to drive the Gazans out of Gaza forever, and who cares how many die, and take over the West Bank and make life so insufferable the Palestinians eventually leave there, as well. Then Israel can have some kind of security within defensible borders (= enormous fences all around)

    Trump is giving them a singular opportunity - unique in their history, unlikely to return - to do this. Right now Israel has nukes and Iran does not, so Israel can do this with relative impunity. The Saudis and Qataris etc will moan but do nothing

    Ergo, I think it will happen and soon

    For the purposes of clarity if i was a young Palestinian I would absolutely loathe Israel, Israelis, Jews - I would be filled with an unquenchable hatred - and for very very understandable reasons

    But it is exactly this that means Israel has to act now

    As i said: bleak
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,553
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    Which will just create even more Hamas terrorists whether they stay in Gaza or are forced out to Jordan or Egypt
  • AnneJGP said:

    viewcode said:

    MaxPB said:

    Trump has telegraphed this since 2016, we've had 8 years to increase defence spending and blister European militaries but we chose to do nothing in Western Europe and preferred to spend money on the endless money pit of old people and healthcare.

    This is because old and sick people have votes. Lots of votes.
    Never mind, the votes won't be needed in the incoming system of governance.

    I believe our current system will soon be supseded.
    You think AV is finally having its day?
    American Veto?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595

    There was an article in the WSJ or WaPo in late 2023 which said how he hated Biden more than Reagan all because of Biden’s visit to Kyiv in 2023.

    Putin had expected to walk around Kyiv being adulated but Biden got there before him but the humiliation that he never recovered from was just before the visit Lloyd Austin ringing up his counterpart in Russia and telling them to pause attacks for the visit of Biden or it would be seen as an attack of war.

    That also explains the vitriol directed at our own Boris Johnson by Russia. Truly the West was lucky to have him in power at that time instead of someone like Cameron who previously offered Putin a way to legitimate his conquests with a 'referendum'.
    ???

    WTAF are you on about?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,776
    Leon said:


    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c

    Her summation:

    "Between the tariffs, the idiotic threats to Canadian and Danish sovereignty, the destruction of USAID, and the undermining of NATO, it's hard to see what the Trump administration would have done differently in their first 2 weeks if their aim were to destroy US power and global influence."
    More accurately I would suggest it is not destroying US power it is mostly shifting it from the US state to US oligarchs alongside some destruction. Many tens of billions will be made with US foreign policy up for sale without scruples. In the end the broligarchs will rule as emperors.
    That’s actually a brilliant analogy which I might steal. America is moving from Roman Republic to Roman Empire
    It's more accurate to say it's moving to late colonial era Britain, when the Empire was at it's most bulbous territorially, but we were past our best as pre-eminent power.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Trump's promise of peace in Gaza and Ukraine lasted less than a month. Hamas already now refusing to release more hostages and Netanyahu threatening more Israeli bombing and special forces raids.

    Now the US Defence Secretary giving Zelensky terms he clearly can't and won't accept so that conflict continues too. European defence spending still needed to be increased regardless anyway given the US is more focused on containing China and its own borders militarily than protecting NATO Europe

    Trump is giving Netanyahu the All Clear to finish Gaza off for good. I suspect that will now happen. Israel will return to the fray - either next weekend or next year - and entirely level Gaza so that not even an ascetic hamster could reoccupy it

    All the facts are a-changing. Pity the Gazans
    Which will just create even more Hamas terrorists whether they stay in Gaza or are forced out to Jordan or Egypt
    Israel won’t care. Better the Jew-haters are in Jordan or Egypt - beyond the world’s biggest walls - than “inside” Israel
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,922

    As a historian it amazes me that for so many people the lessons about appeasement appear to have either been forgotten or never been learned.

    Appeasement gets a bad reputation but was entirely understandable. The politicians of the day had, for the most part, fought in the first war, or at least had close family that did. Even the UK, who got of relatively lightly, had around 850,000 dead as a result. There was no appetite in the UK for fighting another war.

    And many of Germanies demands were not unreasonable. I think history judges Versailles to have been overly harsh on the German nation - the war guilt stuff etc. (Not to say that the Germans would not have been equally bad winners - Brest Litovsk shows that. Drang nach osten didn't start in 1933 after all). Remilitarising your own territory? Fine. Actually having an air force and expanded military? Ok. Re-integrating ethnice Germans into the Reich - well self determination ought to apply to all really.

    And then in reality appeasement bought time. Time to build spitfire factories and design the Lancaster. And also by failing, it gave the causus belli - Hitler said 1938 was the end and he lied. So now we must fight.
    The actual spec for Versailles was that, if it broke down, it would take Germany a decade to be ready for war.

    Germany would have been ready for war in 1942. Hitler actually jumped the gun and started the war with things like the Panzer 1 in the front like.

    U.K. rearmament actually started in 1932. Before Hitler came to power. The trigger was the laying down of the pocket battleships.

    The was a steady ramp up from there. A big issue was that weapons are not potatoes. You can’t just announce “we are doubling military spending”. You need to spend money on the it’s for factories to make the machines for factories that build weapons.

    A lot of Germany’s rearmament money was wasted on “build stuff for parades now!”.

    The UK took the approach of rearming in depth - (re-)building the infrastructure to fight a world war.

    So in 1939, we were just getting to the stage of finalising the actual weapon designs for the war that was coming in 1942 (German nav plans made the date obvious).

    The Spitfire and Hurricane were stopgaps - the “real” fighters were going to be 400mph+, 2000hp engines, uniform cannon armament. Think Hawker Tempest.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554

    There was an article in the WSJ or WaPo in late 2023 which said how he hated Biden more than Reagan all because of Biden’s visit to Kyiv in 2023.

    Putin had expected to walk around Kyiv being adulated but Biden got there before him but the humiliation that he never recovered from was just before the visit Lloyd Austin ringing up his counterpart in Russia and telling them to pause attacks for the visit of Biden or it would be seen as an attack of war.

    That also explains the vitriol directed at our own Boris Johnson by Russia. Truly the West was lucky to have him in power at that time instead of someone like Cameron who previously offered Putin a way to legitimate his conquests with a 'referendum'.
    ???

    WTAF are you on about?
    In his memoirs, Cameron says that he told Putin that holding a referendum in Crimea on joining Russia would be a way of "respecting Russia's interests in Ukraine". If you want to talk about appeasement, Cameron is one of the guilty men.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,350
    edited February 12
    Scott_xP said:

    Apparent;y not a joke...

    @MacFarlaneNews
    Rep Earl Carter (R-GA) introduces legislation “authorizing President Trump to acquire Greenland and renaming it Red, White, and Blueland”

    https://t.co/zRsSwhfcf1

    Mitchell & Webb naming newly-discovered countries, including Greenland Red, White & Blueland
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOBhf8f7cXM
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417

    Leon said:


    Ruth Deyermond
    @ruthdeyermond.bsky.social‬

    This is, first and most importantly, a disaster for Ukraine, but it's also catastrophically bad for European and US security. The US and some in Europe will tell themselves that this is about the US sensibly reprioritising on security. But Putin will see it as capitulation to him.

    https://bsky.app/profile/ruthdeyermond.bsky.social/post/3lhyg5wvkp22c

    Her summation:

    "Between the tariffs, the idiotic threats to Canadian and Danish sovereignty, the destruction of USAID, and the undermining of NATO, it's hard to see what the Trump administration would have done differently in their first 2 weeks if their aim were to destroy US power and global influence."
    More accurately I would suggest it is not destroying US power it is mostly shifting it from the US state to US oligarchs alongside some destruction. Many tens of billions will be made with US foreign policy up for sale without scruples. In the end the broligarchs will rule as emperors.
    That’s actually a brilliant analogy which I might steal. America is moving from Roman Republic to Roman Empire
    It's more accurate to say it's moving to late colonial era Britain, when the Empire was at it's most bulbous territorially, but we were past our best as pre-eminent power.
    No, there is a crucial difference

    America dominates its continent. Canada is its bitch, Mexico is a supplicant

    American can retreat into isolation like no other nation on earth, and it will do just fine

    Britain is a small damp archipelago off NW Europe, we had no mighty homeland to retreat to

    America won’t be a global policeman any more, but they don’t care any more. Maybe China wants the job? Also, America is ahead in crucial technology - only marginally, but still ahead
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,845

    The UK is never going to increase defence spending or fund it properly.

    It'd require too many painful choices, and the electorate would rather spend more on pensions, the NHS and social welfare and will punish politicians who do anything else.

    This is what political leadership if for.
    However I don’t really think there’s been a conscious attempt to lead the British public for many years.
    And, as you say, we don't have it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,845
    rkrkrk said:

    Politically, I think there might be an opportunity for Starmer on defence.
    Farage is weak on this issue, you can call him a Putin appeaser.
    The Tories obviously presided over a long period of defence cuts.

    There is, it's one of Farage’s biggest vulnerabilities.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595

    As a historian it amazes me that for so many people the lessons about appeasement appear to have either been forgotten or never been learned.

    Appeasement gets a bad reputation but was entirely understandable. The politicians of the day had, for the most part, fought in the first war, or at least had close family that did. Even the UK, who got of relatively lightly, had around 850,000 dead as a result. There was no appetite in the UK for fighting another war.

    And many of Germanies demands were not unreasonable. I think history judges Versailles to have been overly harsh on the German nation - the war guilt stuff etc. (Not to say that the Germans would not have been equally bad winners - Brest Litovsk shows that. Drang nach osten didn't start in 1933 after all). Remilitarising your own territory? Fine. Actually having an air force and expanded military? Ok. Re-integrating ethnice Germans into the Reich - well self determination ought to apply to all really.

    And then in reality appeasement bought time. Time to build spitfire factories and design the Lancaster. And also by failing, it gave the causus belli - Hitler said 1938 was the end and he lied. So now we must fight.
    The actual spec for Versailles was that, if it broke down, it would take Germany a decade to be ready for war.

    Germany would have been ready for war in 1942. Hitler actually jumped the gun and started the war with things like the Panzer 1 in the front like.

    U.K. rearmament actually started in 1932. Before Hitler came to power. The trigger was the laying down of the pocket battleships.

    The was a steady ramp up from there. A big issue was that weapons are not potatoes. You can’t just announce “we are doubling military spending”. You need to spend money on the it’s for factories to make the machines for factories that build weapons.

    A lot of Germany’s rearmament money was wasted on “build stuff for parades now!”.

    The UK took the approach of rearming in depth - (re-)building the infrastructure to fight a world war.

    So in 1939, we were just getting to the stage of finalising the actual weapon designs for the war that was coming in 1942 (German nav plans made the date obvious).

    The Spitfire and Hurricane were stopgaps - the “real” fighters were going to be 400mph+, 2000hp engines, uniform cannon armament. Think Hawker Tempest.
    I agree with much of that, but would argue engine development was as, if not more, important than airframe development. Prop engines were really at the bleeding edge of technological development, and entire airframe designs failed because their proposed engines did not come to fruition. This was true for every major power.
This discussion has been closed.