I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Because after the collapse of NATO and a comprehensive Russian regrouping, Putin is free to attack Ukraine, the Baltic States, Scandinavia and Poland. Although not necessarily in that sequence.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
I think he wants a peaceful world because conflict detracts attention from him. He wants to stride the world with all eyes on his best ever trade deals.
But he has also said that he wants people to stop dying in large numbers in Ukraine. I don't have a huge problem in reconciling the two views.
As for Europe rearming I'm not so sure this will be a huge political consensus.
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
PB-shrewdie advice again. People should do this because I agree with it, so how can I make it look like sage psephological commentary?
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
More an obnoxious, giant Dickensian.
A tale of two cities?, bleak house?,
Well, I didn't exactly have Great Expectations of him.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
Trump is actually more sympathetic to dictators than to democracies.
Here's an interview with Thomas Zimmer a German who is a 20th century American history professor at Georgetown University
"tagesschau24: Some analysts say that Zelenskyj behaved tactically clumsily during the conversation because he started a fundamental debate about US security guarantees and military aid in front of the cameras. What do you think about that?
Zimmer: I think that's completely wrong because it's based on a very fundamental misunderstanding: the idea that Trump's position on this issue can be controlled by tactical skill and diplomatic finesse. That's wishful thinking that continues to cling to the idea that Trump doesn't have a consistent position at all. He's perhaps just a businessman who wants to negotiate a good deal and also someone to whom you can somehow sell anything through flattery.But that completely ignores the fact that Trump has had a very clear stance on this conflict for many years now and a very clear inclination towards Russia and autocratic rulers like Putin. It also completely ignores the fact that the Trumpist forces that are now in power in the USA are pursuing a clear, ideologically defined project. They are really serious about turning away from the liberal world order, from Europe's liberal democracies. They have something completely different in mind. We have to let go of the idea that with a little skill, with a little tact, all of this can somehow be averted."
" I don't think it makes sense to continue to hold out hope that Trump, the Trumpist government or the Republican Party will be able to pursue any policies other than what we have now experienced."
Yes, the US is not neutrally failing to back Ukraine sufficiently, they are actively choosing Russia. The US now have their own expansionist ambitions in Panama, Greenland, Mexico, maybe even Canada and Putin's worldview suits them far better than the (pre) existing Western one.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
More an obnoxious, giant Dickensian.
A tale of two cities?, bleak house?,
Well, I didn't exactly have Great Expectations of him.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
More an obnoxious, giant Dickensian.
A tale of two cities?, bleak house?,
Well, I didn't exactly have Great Expectations of him.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
More an obnoxious, giant Dickensian.
A tale of two cities?, bleak house?,
Well, I didn't exactly have Great Expectations of him.
Dumby and sons.
I suspect that post has been crafted over many years in anticipation of Dickensian pun day on PB.
If the Americans have stopped weapons deliveries and technical support then they are not in a position to negotiate. The EU, Britain, Norway, Switzerland need to negotiate a ceasefire as they still supply Ukraine.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
I think he wants a peaceful world because conflict detracts attention from him. He wants to stride the world with all eyes on his best ever trade deals.
But he has also said that he wants people to stop dying in large numbers in Ukraine. I don't have a huge problem in reconciling the two views.
As for Europe rearming I'm not so sure this will be a huge political consensus.
Donald Trump has no real interest in stopping dying in large numbers in Ukraine. Otherwise he would prioritise provision of patriot missiles. That is just disingenuous talk. He might be interested in stopping fighting on Russia's terms, but that's different.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Because it is not honest. We all want the killings to stop. Signing a peace deal now with no security guarantees is not an end to the killings but a pause to the killings giving Russia time to re-build and consent to start their next expansionist war elsewhere.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring peace, it enables genocide.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring peace, it enables genocide.
I think this probably needs a bit of an accompanying explainer?
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
Considering he was quite happy to kill several Americans in a failed bid to stay in power, and threaten to lynch his own Vice President, as well as invade multiple random states nearby and ethnically cleanse Gaza, I'm not totally convinced by the reasoning of this post.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
"Houston to USSS Truss, your nightly CBS News broadcast for Friday 2- 28- 2025 is enclosed-enjoy".
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring peace, it enables genocide.
Yes, the way to stop the killing is for Russia to stop attacking. The Ukranians can't stop the war unilaterally.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Coming late to this, but I seem to recall that Trump has repeatedly said that he wants the killing to stop. Now one might or might not believe him, given how behaves to those he regards as illegal immigrants to the US but I think that there is a belief somewhere in his mind that everyone should look after themselves in their own countries. How he squares that with the fact that the land where he lives is dominated by immigrants and that his own grandfather and his mother were immigrants I don't know, but we'll let that that pass. I think he's also sympathetic to Putin, but I think he accepts, most of the time, that Putin invaded Ukraine, but I suspect he also thinks, probably as a result of Putin's discussions with him, that Ukraine is an artificial state, and further that Ukraine hasn't a very good 'democratic' history.
For the avoidance of doubt that's what I think Trump thinks, from the way he behaves; it's not my own opinion of the situation.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Coming late to this, but I seem to recall that Trump has repeatedly said that he wants the killing to stop. Now one might or might not believe him, given how behaves to those he regards as illegal immigrants to the US but I think that there is a belief somewhere in his mind that everyone should look after themselves in their own countries. How he squares that with the fact that the land where he lives is dominated by immigrants and that his own grandfather and his mother were immigrants I don't know, but we'll let that that pass. I think he's also sympathetic to Putin, but I think he accepts, most of the time, that Putin invaded Ukraine, but I suspect he also thinks, probably as a result of Putin's discussions with him, that Ukraine is an artificial state, and further that Ukraine hasn't a very good 'democratic' history.
For the avoidance of doubt that's what I think Trump thinks, from the way he behaves; it's not my own opinion of the situation.
Well, to be fair, Ukraine doesn't have a great democratic history. And it is corrupt from top to bottom. Nobody disputes that, least of all Zelensky who rose to power by satirizing these things.
But since that's partly because of incessant Russian meddling in its elections and economy it's not really a valid point in this context.
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
PB-shrewdie advice again. People should do this because I agree with it, so how can I make it look like sage psephological commentary?
The Tories are free to do whatever they want. But if they want my vote back, they will need to start from the position of confronting the new geopolitical realities. That is how we get to a position of greater economic security, and indeed border security.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Yes, by saving a lot of lives the US certainly made people feel better disposed towards it. Now that a lot of people are going to die because of the cuts that is probably going to change.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
More an obnoxious, giant Dickensian.
A tale of two cities?, bleak house?,
Well, I didn't exactly have Great Expectations of him.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring peace, it enables genocide.
I think this probably needs a bit of an accompanying explainer?
No, it was a perfectly reasonable narrative for any perfectly reasonable reader. Clearly it gets a bit too complicated for Trump fanbois.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Because after the collapse of NATO and a comprehensive Russian regrouping, Putin is free to attack Ukraine, the Baltic States, Scandinavia and Poland. Although not necessarily in that sequence.
Not to mention that every country that feels existentially threatened will acquire nuclear weapons.
Cue Corbyn and Co. demanding sanctions again Poland, South Korea, Taiwan..
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Yes, by saving a lot of lives the US certainly made people feel better disposed towards it. Now that a lot of people are going to die because of the cuts that is probably going to change.
How sweet that you think it was designed to save a lot of lives.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Oh Toppers, you are better than this. Give your head a wobble.
I had a forlorn hope that when the Dems were trying to hide, and failing to so, that Biden was away with the Fairies, that someone like Nicky Haley might win Republican Primary. No chance.
The Yanks still haven't got the hang of democracy. The last eighty years were an abberation, not the norm. The Russians never really did get the hang of it.
Even the Danes have the wind up now, even though the Russkies would have to fight through Latvia and Sweden to get there. By then, Putin and Trump will be long gone, so you can relax, Ms Fredriksen.
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
PB-shrewdie advice again. People should do this because I agree with it, so how can I make it look like sage psephological commentary?
The Tories are free to do whatever they want. But if they want my vote back, they will need to start from the position of confronting the new geopolitical realities. That is how we get to a position of greater economic security, and indeed border security.
We have the worst Government in living history. Their energy policy alone is killing the economy upon which your lifestyle and mine depends, right now. We are shutting our virgin steel making capacity now. The Grangemouth refinery is shutting now. These things *are* destroying our security as we speak - it is ludicrously self-indulgent to speak of withholding your vote from anyone who could unseat a Labour MP because you want them to signal that they will commit our moribund armed forces to a European army.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring peace, it enables genocide.
I think this probably needs a bit of an accompanying explainer?
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
Back in the day, I was on UKISAR, and the US played a big part in that. I did a load of really excellent exercises with teams from around the world, including a week in Venice. The yanks always bought tons of equipment with them, funded by USAID. If you needed any kit for Urban Search and Rescue, it'd be in one of the containers the USAF had flown over. If that part is cut, not just poor countries will suffer. Any at risk of natural disaster would want the US team there.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Oh Toppers, you are better than this. Give your head a wobble.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Because after the collapse of NATO and a comprehensive Russian regrouping, Putin is free to attack Ukraine, the Baltic States, Scandinavia and Poland. Although not necessarily in that sequence.
Not to mention that every country that feels existentially threatened will acquire nuclear weapons.
Cue Corbyn and Co. demanding sanctions again Poland, South Korea, Taiwan..
Yes. And whilst after Starmer soiled himself on Thursday by awarding Trump his holiday in Scotland, from both the left and the right we demanded his head, the alternative could be even worse. Prime Minister Clive Lewis?
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
PB-shrewdie advice again. People should do this because I agree with it, so how can I make it look like sage psephological commentary?
The Tories are free to do whatever they want. But if they want my vote back, they will need to start from the position of confronting the new geopolitical realities. That is how we get to a position of greater economic security, and indeed border security.
We have the worst Government in living history. Their energy policy alone is killing the economy upon which your lifestyle and mine depends, right now. We are shutting our virgin steel making capacity now. The Grangemouth refinery is shutting now. These things *are* destroying our security as we speak - it is ludicrously self-indulgent to speak of withholding your vote from anyone who could unseat a Labour MP because you want them to signal that they will commit our moribund armed forces to a European army.
I do not think the Labour Party are getting much right. Indeed if there was an election tomorrow I wouldn’t vote for them (I don’t actually have a clue how I would vote, I feel more politically homeless than at any stage in my adult life. If pushed, I would probably go Tory, but that isn’t an easy decision, as I remain wholly unconvinced that they are ready to grasp these issues either).
I will judge the parties on how they handle decisions like the above. This is all integrated - a strong European defence means greater security at home too, and Labours feet should be held to the fire on that.
And I do not believe in a European Army. A pan-European alliance, yes. A possibility for broader co-operation on common economic and security goals? Absolutely yes.
Ultimately Ukraine and Russia will have to settle. The US will probably be part of this settlement. It is not an "honest broker" (shouldn't necessarily be one in my view) and as long as Trump is around it doesn't have Ukraine's interest at heart either.
To the extent anyone else has any agency we should (in my view) try to get a settlement that somewhat protects Ukraine for several very compelling reasons.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring peace, it enables genocide.
I think this probably needs a bit of an accompanying explainer?
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
"Now, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2024 and already in 2025, are facing an 80% reduction in already-insufficient resources due to recent USAID cuts."
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
Russia is very good at projecting strength from a position of weakness. It has learned that trick from history. The Soviet Union’s power and strength became a mirage during the Brezhnev decline, but they were able to keep the house of cards standing for another decade.
It will all look fine in Russia, until one day it isn’t.
Indeed. Going back to my original comment - gradually at first, then suddenly.
Russia has a tradition of revolutions taking three days.
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Option 3 is the game plan
Back to the 2021 borders (I’d prefer 2014 personally but that’s the compromise).
Kursk thrown in for free unless Russia plays silly buggers and then it’s Kursk for something
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
It would appear from your link that basic emergency relief programmes are being retained (I thought all aid had ceased) but funding of foundations and the charitable sector has been severely curtailed). I agree with this and something similar is what we need in the UK. We have 'charities' here that make less than 5% of their money from donations, and are almost wholly funded by Government grant. They then campaign from their unassaible 'charity' pulpit for policy changes in areas like immigration. It is a complete racket and if the USA has anything similar (which I strongly suspect it did/does) it's a very good thing that funding is being withdrawn. The Spectator has an interesting podcast on the above if anyone is interested.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
But isn't that what Chamberlain thought he was doing at Munich? Hitler's assurance was not worth the paper it was written on.
Chamberlain sought peace, but simultaneously prepared for war.
Trump isn't fit to lick Chamberlain's boots.
I suspect Trump is also planning for war. An Abrams tanks and Lightening IIs for Russian oil contra deal would be so "beautiful".
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
PB-shrewdie advice again. People should do this because I agree with it, so how can I make it look like sage psephological commentary?
The Tories are free to do whatever they want. But if they want my vote back, they will need to start from the position of confronting the new geopolitical realities. That is how we get to a position of greater economic security, and indeed border security.
We have the worst Government in living history. Their energy policy alone is killing the economy upon which your lifestyle and mine depends, right now. We are shutting our virgin steel making capacity now. The Grangemouth refinery is shutting now. These things *are* destroying our security as we speak - it is ludicrously self-indulgent to speak of withholding your vote from anyone who could unseat a Labour MP because you want them to signal that they will commit our moribund armed forces to a European army.
Were you in the UK from 2015 through 2024 or did you recently return?
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
I think the BBC is the wrong vehicle. Sarah Smith's report after the Oval Office debacle was shameful.
My disdain for the BBC is relatively recent. The Boris Johnson cenotaph incident and News night equalising the opinion of the Head of the World Bank with that of Andrea Leadsom's opinion turned my head.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Nah 10x its funding. More free speech. Balance out the manure pumped out from Moscow.
Meanwhile, not to add fuel to the flames, and although against the rules, I can understand why Tank took a knee which he believed was the only way to not get hit and have a time out while he was sorting out his hair.
But it should have been a 10-8 round I appreciate that.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
"Now, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2024 and already in 2025, are facing an 80% reduction in already-insufficient resources due to recent USAID cuts."
Mutual Aid Sudan is funded by the following organisations (ai)
The Coalition for Mutual Aid in Sudan is supported by 15 philanthropies and other organizations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Center for Humanitarian Leadership, and the Center for Disaster Philanthropy.
Leaving aside the fact that anything with Bill Gates is a huge red flag to me, why can't the organisations that actually set up this initiative, who it would appear are not short of a bob or two, fund it?
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
I think the BBC is the wrong vehicle. Sarah Smith's report after the Oval Office debacle was shameful.
My disdain for the BBC is relatively recent. The Boris Johnson cenotaph incident and News night equalising the opinion of the Head of the World Bank with that of Andrea Leadsom's opinion turned my head.
Well , maybe split in two or three online agencies. And then seriously up the funding. More free speech, but in this case actual free speech and facts, not propaganda lines from Moscow.
If you call out to ban someone you will get banned yourself. Seems an equitable solution...
Does that include calling out to ban someone for calling for a ban too? Or even calling out someone, calling out someone, for calling for a ban......oh shit......
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
That could very well be the most hypocritical and least self-aware comment that anybody has made on PB, ever. Well done to you.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
"Now, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2024 and already in 2025, are facing an 80% reduction in already-insufficient resources due to recent USAID cuts."
Mutual Aid Sudan is funded by the following organisations (ai)
The Coalition for Mutual Aid in Sudan is supported by 15 philanthropies and other organizations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Center for Humanitarian Leadership, and the Center for Disaster Philanthropy.
Leaving aside the fact that anything with Bill Gates is a huge red flag to me, why can't the organisations that actually set up this initiative, who it would appear are not short of a bob or two, fund it?
Seems like whataboutism to me. Either the cuts are going to do harm or they won't. In this case mothers are dying outside locked clinics in childbirth.
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
That could very well be the most hypocritical and least self-aware comment that anybody has made on PB, ever. Well done to you.
Oh go on, bore me to death, how is that hypocritical?
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
PB-shrewdie advice again. People should do this because I agree with it, so how can I make it look like sage psephological commentary?
The Tories are free to do whatever they want. But if they want my vote back, they will need to start from the position of confronting the new geopolitical realities. That is how we get to a position of greater economic security, and indeed border security.
We have the worst Government in living history. Their energy policy alone is killing the economy upon which your lifestyle and mine depends, right now. We are shutting our virgin steel making capacity now. The Grangemouth refinery is shutting now. These things *are* destroying our security as we speak - it is ludicrously self-indulgent to speak of withholding your vote from anyone who could unseat a Labour MP because you want them to signal that they will commit our moribund armed forces to a European army.
Were you in the UK from 2015 through 2024 or did you recently return?
Did I support the Sunak Government? I don't recall that I did.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
It would appear from your link that basic emergency relief programmes are being retained (I thought all aid had ceased) but funding of foundations and the charitable sector has been severely curtailed). I agree with this and something similar is what we need in the UK. We have 'charities' here that make less than 5% of their money from donations, and are almost wholly funded by Government grant. They then campaign from their unassaible 'charity' pulpit for policy changes in areas like immigration. It is a complete racket and if the USA has anything similar (which I strongly suspect it did/does) it's a very good thing that funding is being withdrawn. The Spectator has an interesting podcast on the above if anyone is interested.
A lot of people are going to die as a result of the decisions taken. So let's not pretend that Trump is in anyway interested in stopping people from dying.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
This Government has had enough common sense to see they can't continue to kick the licence fee can along the road any longer.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Yes, by saving a lot of lives the US certainly made people feel better disposed towards it. Now that a lot of people are going to die because of the cuts that is probably going to change.
How sweet that you think it was designed to save a lot of lives.
You’re not familiar with PEPFAR, then ?
That’s possibly the clearest single example, but here’s a list for you to run your hegemony ruler over.
Yesterday, Rubio terminated 5800 USAID contracts – more than 90% of its foreign aid programs – in defiance of the courts.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
If Trump was serious about peace he would tell the Russians to go home. They could go home now. But somehow that never occurs to him. It’s weird. Not one word. I wonder why.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
I think the BBC is the wrong vehicle. Sarah Smith's report after the Oval Office debacle was shameful.
My disdain for the BBC is relatively recent. The Boris Johnson cenotaph incident and News night equalising the opinion of the Head of the World Bank with that of Andrea Leadsom's opinion turned my head.
BBC reporting from the US has been problematic for a very long time. (The revered Alistair Cooke was basically a conservative.)
It’s simply that Trump’s election(s) have more sharply highlighted the way it cleaves to a particular narrative.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Yes, by saving a lot of lives the US certainly made people feel better disposed towards it. Now that a lot of people are going to die because of the cuts that is probably going to change.
How sweet that you think it was designed to save a lot of lives.
How sweet that you think that I am as naive as that. A person whose life is saved as the result of a political decision is just as alive as a person as a person whose life is saved by an act altruism.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
It would appear from your link that basic emergency relief programmes are being retained (I thought all aid had ceased) but funding of foundations and the charitable sector has been severely curtailed). I agree with this and something similar is what we need in the UK. We have 'charities' here that make less than 5% of their money from donations, and are almost wholly funded by Government grant. They then campaign from their unassaible 'charity' pulpit for policy changes in areas like immigration. It is a complete racket and if the USA has anything similar (which I strongly suspect it did/does) it's a very good thing that funding is being withdrawn. The Spectator has an interesting podcast on the above if anyone is interested.
A lot of people are going to die as a result of the decisions taken. So let's not pretend that Trump is in anyway interested in stopping people from dying.
I don't agree, and this certainly has not been shown in the links you posted, which I have done you the courtesy of reading.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
Bart, your capitalist corporate-driven utopia does not work when nation states are using nation state resources to undermine it. The free market cannot overcome that kind of attack.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
Bart, your capitalist corporate-driven utopia does not work when nation states are using nation state resources to undermine it. The free market cannot overcome that kind of attack.
Of course it can. We should reinforce and strengthen our markets and compete and outgrow those nation states that are squandering their own resources inefficiently.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
Bart, your capitalist corporate-driven utopia does not work when nation states are using nation state resources to undermine it. The free market cannot overcome that kind of attack.
Of course it can. We should reinforce and strengthen our markets and compete and outgrow those nation states that are squandering their own resources inefficiently.
I honestly think that is naive. Humans are not rational actors especially when faced with state-sponsored propaganda rage-bait via the internet.
Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).
Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.
No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.
Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.
Isn't this Putin's argument? Continuous war simply avoids the necessity to make peace with your neighbours. Seems Masada is too far back in history for it to be remembered.
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
That could very well be the most hypocritical and least self-aware comment that anybody has made on PB, ever. Well done to you.
Oh go on, bore me to death, how is that hypocritical?
You profess to be an atheist but it's a very religious take.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
Bart, your capitalist corporate-driven utopia does not work when nation states are using nation state resources to undermine it. The free market cannot overcome that kind of attack.
Of course it can. We should reinforce and strengthen our markets and compete and outgrow those nation states that are squandering their own resources inefficiently.
I honestly think that is naive. Humans are not rational actors especially when faced with state-sponsored propaganda rage-bait via the internet.
Its naïve to think that investing in 1950s linear TV or radio is going to combat that. The genie is out of the bottle already.
The BBC should sink or swim on its own merits, we don't need to pay a licence fee to fund Eastenders or Match of the Day or Glastonbury or almost all of the BBC's programming. If people want to subscribe to that, let them.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
"Now, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2024 and already in 2025, are facing an 80% reduction in already-insufficient resources due to recent USAID cuts."
Along with our own forthcoming 50% reduction in overseas aid spending, don’t forget. We aren’t exactly outside if all this, either.
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
That could very well be the most hypocritical and least self-aware comment that anybody has made on PB, ever. Well done to you.
Oh go on, bore me to death, how is that hypocritical?
You profess to be an atheist but it's a very religious take.
I am an atheist and a man of science, logic and mathematics.
They tell us that the probability of death for all of us is 1. We are all going to die. You can not halt, cancel, or prevent death - only postpone it.
I believe we all have only one life and its up to us to make the most of it. I would rather a life spent well in liberty than one with death postponed but subjugated to slavery or authoritarianism.
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
Bart, your capitalist corporate-driven utopia does not work when nation states are using nation state resources to undermine it. The free market cannot overcome that kind of attack.
Of course it can. We should reinforce and strengthen our markets and compete and outgrow those nation states that are squandering their own resources inefficiently.
I honestly think that is naive. Humans are not rational actors especially when faced with state-sponsored propaganda rage-bait via the internet.
Its naïve to think that investing in 1950s linear TV or radio is going to combat that. The genie is out of the bottle already.
The BBC should sink or swim on its own merits, we don't need to pay a licence fee to fund Eastenders or Match of the Day or Glastonbury or almost all of the BBC's programming. If people want to subscribe to that, let them.
I don't really care about the BBC. I was talking more generally. Corporate power and "the market" cannot overpower a nation state
We need to increase funding to the BBC. And setup programmes that can flood the zone with facts. Outgun the Russian bots and their minions and beat them at their own game.
Fuck that. We need to abolish the license fee and let the BBC find their own funding. Subscription, ads or whatever.
Direct taxation on either internet access or via the council tax.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
Neither, let people choose to subscribe and if they choose not to that's their free choice.
Bart, your capitalist corporate-driven utopia does not work when nation states are using nation state resources to undermine it. The free market cannot overcome that kind of attack.
Of course it can. We should reinforce and strengthen our markets and compete and outgrow those nation states that are squandering their own resources inefficiently.
I honestly think that is naive. Humans are not rational actors especially when faced with state-sponsored propaganda rage-bait via the internet.
Its naïve to think that investing in 1950s linear TV or radio is going to combat that. The genie is out of the bottle already.
The BBC should sink or swim on its own merits, we don't need to pay a licence fee to fund Eastenders or Match of the Day or Glastonbury or almost all of the BBC's programming. If people want to subscribe to that, let them.
I don't really care about the BBC. I was talking more generally. Corporate power and "the market" cannot overpower a nation state
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
It would appear from your link that basic emergency relief programmes are being retained (I thought all aid had ceased) but funding of foundations and the charitable sector has been severely curtailed). I agree with this and something similar is what we need in the UK. We have 'charities' here that make less than 5% of their money from donations, and are almost wholly funded by Government grant. They then campaign from their unassaible 'charity' pulpit for policy changes in areas like immigration. It is a complete racket and if the USA has anything similar (which I strongly suspect it did/does) it's a very good thing that funding is being withdrawn. The Spectator has an interesting podcast on the above if anyone is interested.
A lot of people are going to die as a result of the decisions taken. So let's not pretend that Trump is in anyway interested in stopping people from dying.
I don't agree, and this certainly has not been shown in the links you posted, which I have done you the courtesy of reading.
U.S.-funded projects worldwide, including those providing lifesaving care for millions of people in countries such as Sudan and South Africa, received termination notices on Thursday sending shockwaves across the global aid community
Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).
Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.
No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.
Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.
Isn't this Putin's argument? Continuous war simply avoids the necessity to make peace with your neighbours. Seems Masada is too far back in history for it to be remembered.
Putin is the aggressor.
I support the victim in fighting back, whether that victim be Ukraine or Israel.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
"Now, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2024 and already in 2025, are facing an 80% reduction in already-insufficient resources due to recent USAID cuts."
Mutual Aid Sudan is funded by the following organisations (ai)
The Coalition for Mutual Aid in Sudan is supported by 15 philanthropies and other organizations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Center for Humanitarian Leadership, and the Center for Disaster Philanthropy.
Leaving aside the fact that anything with Bill Gates is a huge red flag to me, why can't the organisations that actually set up this initiative, who it would appear are not short of a bob or two, fund it?
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
It would appear from your link that basic emergency relief programmes are being retained (I thought all aid had ceased) but funding of foundations and the charitable sector has been severely curtailed). I agree with this and something similar is what we need in the UK. We have 'charities' here that make less than 5% of their money from donations, and are almost wholly funded by Government grant. They then campaign from their unassaible 'charity' pulpit for policy changes in areas like immigration. It is a complete racket and if the USA has anything similar (which I strongly suspect it did/does) it's a very good thing that funding is being withdrawn. The Spectator has an interesting podcast on the above if anyone is interested.
The government funding isn't just random money given to Save the Children etc to do with what they will. The government is paying them to deliver specific programmes on behalf of the government, because they can typically deliver better outcomes at a lower cost than if the government were to try to deliver the project themselves. By employing local people on the ground, for instance. And while as in all human endeavours there will be some inefficiency and waste, there is probably more effort put into measuring outcomes and delivering value for money than in any other area of public spending. It's also worth pointing out that a good chunk of our "aid budget" is actually diverted into housing asylum seakers in this country, not spent on humanitarian assistance abroad. Off the top of my head I think it will be about half of it once the cuts take effect.
Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).
Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.
No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.
Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.
You are responding to a williamglenn post. You don’t think he might have selected a tweet from a somewhat biased source? Are you really that naive?
Happy second fasting day of Ramadan. Many Muslim charities are currently appealing for donations.
And happy Oscars night tonight.
The worst thing about this Ramadan this year is that Eid is likely to be at weekend and I cannot use work to get out of going to the mosque.
When I worked in 24x7 ops, our Muslim colleagues all volunteered for night shifts during Ramadan. It turns out fasting during daylight hours is a damn sight easier if you are asleep after working nights.
I believe those travelling are allowed to break the fast. This includes those traveling by car, ship, airplane, or camel.
Get yourself a camel, TSE. That will be quite the commute...
At the weekend, it’s likely to be a rail replacement camel.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Donald Trump’s distaste for killing foreigners has been noted as one of his biggest failings by the PB panzer corps (armchair division) many times before. We are in truly dark times when a US President gets queasy about half a million deaths.
The ending of various USAID programmes is going to kill tens of thousands of foreigners. Trump has not the slightest problem with it.
I strongly doubt it. The ending of bizarre and troubling funding of such organisations as the BBC by USAID is certainly going to do very little harm.
It would appear from your link that basic emergency relief programmes are being retained (I thought all aid had ceased) but funding of foundations and the charitable sector has been severely curtailed). I agree with this and something similar is what we need in the UK. We have 'charities' here that make less than 5% of their money from donations, and are almost wholly funded by Government grant. They then campaign from their unassaible 'charity' pulpit for policy changes in areas like immigration. It is a complete racket and if the USA has anything similar (which I strongly suspect it did/does) it's a very good thing that funding is being withdrawn. The Spectator has an interesting podcast on the above if anyone is interested.
The government funding isn't just random money given to Save the Children etc to do with what they will. The government is paying them to deliver specific programmes on behalf of the government, because they can typically deliver better outcomes at a lower cost than if the government were to try to deliver the project themselves. By employing local people on the ground, for instance. And while as in all human endeavours there will be some inefficiency and waste, there is probably more effort put into measuring outcomes and delivering value for money than in any other area of public spending. It's also worth pointing out that a good chunk of our "aid budget" is actually diverted into housing asylum seakers in this country, not spent on humanitarian assistance abroad. Off the top of my head I think it will be about half of it once the cuts take effect.
I would like to see a blanket ban on any taxpayers money going to any "charities" that spend money campaigning for taxpayers money. The grift is circular and needs to be broken.
If they're genuinely a charity just providing a service, then that wouldn't harm them.
Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).
Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.
No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.
Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.
You are responding to a williamglenn post. You don’t think he might have selected a tweet from a somewhat biased source? Are you really that naive?
"Netanyahu dispatched his military attache for a series of meetings in Moscow this week. His message: Israel prefers that Russia stays in Syria - instead of Turkey."
Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).
Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.
No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.
Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.
You are responding to a williamglenn post. You don’t think he might have selected a tweet from a somewhat biased source? Are you really that naive?
Oh I know full well he might have.
Not as naïve as the individual who claimed with a straight face that Israel is not at war with Syria. Who was that again?
Happy second fasting day of Ramadan. Many Muslim charities are currently appealing for donations.
And happy Oscars night tonight.
The worst thing about this Ramadan this year is that Eid is likely to be at weekend and I cannot use work to get out of going to the mosque.
When I worked in 24x7 ops, our Muslim colleagues all volunteered for night shifts during Ramadan. It turns out fasting during daylight hours is a damn sight easier if you are asleep after working nights.
I believe those travelling are allowed to break the fast. This includes those traveling by car, ship, airplane, or camel.
Get yourself a camel, TSE. That will be quite the commute...
At the weekend, it’s likely to be a rail replacement camel.
Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).
Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.
No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.
Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.
You are responding to a williamglenn post. You don’t think he might have selected a tweet from a somewhat biased source? Are you really that naive?
Oh I know full well he might have.
Not as naïve as the individual who claimed with a straight face that Israel is not at war with Syria. Who was that again?
Israel and Syria are legally at war, but there has been a UN-overseen ceasefire for decades. Israel has now repeatedly attacked Syria, unprovoked. They marched into the UN buffer zone. They have repeatedly bombed Syria. This is landgrab.
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
That could very well be the most hypocritical and least self-aware comment that anybody has made on PB, ever. Well done to you.
Being a Ukrainian Ultra on pb.com requires a certain level of intellectual incoherence and unending attraction to amor fati. The following two lemmata must be simultaneously upheld:
1. The armed forces of the Russian Federation are so weak that a broken failed state that's a quarter of the size can, if supplied with endless amounts of money and weapons, inflict a stinging defeat of such magnitude that the invaders will be repelled and the Russian military threat will be neutralised in perpetuity.
2. The armed forces of the Russian Federation are so strong that the UK must embark on a socially ruinous program of rearmament or the double headed eagle, twice imperially crowned will be flying over Piccadilly Circus by next (Orthodox) Christmas.
Its funny Topping how during and after Covid you were able to recognise that "but people are dying" isn't a surefire argument winner to take away people's liberties, even temporarily, yet you seem to think "but people are dying" is a surefire argument winner to permanently subjugate people to living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
That could very well be the most hypocritical and least self-aware comment that anybody has made on PB, ever. Well done to you.
Being a Ukrainian Ultra on pb.com requires a certain level of intellectual incoherence and unending attraction to amor fati. The following two lemmata must be simultaneously upheld:
1. The armed forces of the Russian Federation are so weak that a broken failed state that's a quarter of the size can, if supplied with endless amounts of money and weapons, inflict a stinging defeat of such magnitude that the invaders will be repelled and the Russian military threat will be neutralised in perpetuity.
2. The armed forces of the Russian Federation are so strong that the UK must embark on a socially ruinous program of rearmament or the double headed eagle, twice imperially crowned will be flying over Piccadilly Circus by next (Orthodox) Christmas.
Or 3. A life in Vilnius is as valuable as a life in Newent.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
Given what he is doing to USAID and to various programmes domestically, it's very clear Trump has no concern about stopping people from dying. As you say, he is entirely transactional and has no understanding of the US's interests being in any way separate to his own. This is why he cannot see how withdrawing from a leadership role is going to do so much harm to the American economy.
USAID was and is one of the most important tools of propagating the global US hegemony. No surprise that PB is furious that Trump is curtailing it.
Yes, by saving a lot of lives the US certainly made people feel better disposed towards it. Now that a lot of people are going to die because of the cuts that is probably going to change.
How sweet that you think it was designed to save a lot of lives.
How sweet that you think that I am as naive as that. A person whose life is saved as the result of a political decision is just as alive as a person as a person whose life is saved by an act altruism.
That’s just silly.
A person saved by Tory aid doesn’t count, because it was malevolent, racist scum aid.
A person saved by Progressive Government aid saves the world entire.
Comments
But he has also said that he wants people to stop dying in large numbers in Ukraine. I don't have a huge problem in reconciling the two views.
As for Europe rearming I'm not so sure this will be a huge political consensus.
Very good!
It does not stop the killings.
How he squares that with the fact that the land where he lives is dominated by immigrants and that his own grandfather and his mother were immigrants I don't know, but we'll let that that pass.
I think he's also sympathetic to Putin, but I think he accepts, most of the time, that Putin invaded Ukraine, but I suspect he also thinks, probably as a result of Putin's discussions with him, that Ukraine is an artificial state, and further that Ukraine hasn't a very good 'democratic' history.
For the avoidance of doubt that's what I think Trump thinks, from the way he behaves; it's not my own opinion of the situation.
But since that's partly because of incessant Russian meddling in its elections and economy it's not really a valid point in this context.
Cue Corbyn and Co. demanding sanctions again Poland, South Korea, Taiwan..
https://apnews.com/article/trump-usaid-aid-cut-doge-musk-dbaf0e89d72938caabee8251f7dfb4a7
https://healthpolicy-watch.news/us-terminates-thousands-of-life-saving-health-grants-including-for-hiv/
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/27/foreign-aid-cuts-usaid-hiv-malaria-00206564
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/services-collapsing-usaid-cuts-health-contracts-worldwide-2025-02-27/
The Yanks still haven't got the hang of democracy. The last eighty years were an abberation, not the norm. The Russians never really did get the hang of it.
Even the Danes have the wind up now, even though the Russkies would have to fight through Latvia and Sweden to get there. By then, Putin and Trump will be long gone, so you can relax, Ms Fredriksen.
If that part is cut, not just poor countries will suffer. Any at risk of natural disaster would want the US team there.
https://liberationnews.org/usaid-the-humanitarian-face-of-colonial-exploitation/
I will judge the parties on how they handle decisions like the above. This is all integrated - a strong European defence means greater security at home too, and Labours feet should be held to the fire on that.
And I do not believe in a European Army. A pan-European alliance, yes. A possibility for broader co-operation on common economic and security goals? Absolutely yes.
To the extent anyone else has any agency we should (in my view) try to get a settlement that somewhat protects Ukraine for several very compelling reasons.
"Now, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2024 and already in 2025, are facing an 80% reduction in already-insufficient resources due to recent USAID cuts."
Back to the 2021 borders (I’d prefer 2014 personally but that’s the compromise).
Kursk thrown in for free unless Russia plays silly buggers and then it’s Kursk for something
https://youtu.be/CaIQI0hUzQU?si=1Ww62sttPe-WEDeP
I could see Trump doing that.
A clever, funny, parody song you’ll all love.
After that the emergency podcast from Alistair and Rory.
https://x.com/marshsongs/status/1895956955744911765?s=61
My disdain for the BBC is relatively recent. The Boris Johnson cenotaph incident and News night equalising the opinion of the Head of the World Bank with that of Andrea Leadsom's opinion turned my head.
But it should have been a 10-8 round I appreciate that.
Leaving aside the fact that anything with Bill Gates is a huge red flag to me, why can't the organisations that actually set up this initiative, who it would appear are not short of a bob or two, fund it?
There are some fates worse than death. If people are willing to fight against dictatorships I respect that, I don't think that people are dying is a reason to end a just war.
Take your pick one or the other is coming..
This Government has had enough common sense to see they can't continue to kick the licence fee can along the road any longer.
That’s possibly the clearest single example, but here’s a list for you to run your hegemony ruler over.
Yesterday, Rubio terminated 5800 USAID contracts – more than 90% of its foreign aid programs – in defiance of the courts.
Here’s a list of just some of the lifesaving awards that were terminated. Nearly all were Congressional mandated. They've saved millions of lives. 🧵
https://x.com/Atul_Gawande/status/1895211787748065375
(The revered Alistair Cooke was basically a conservative.)
It’s simply that Trump’s election(s) have more sharply highlighted the way it cleaves to a particular narrative.
The BBC should sink or swim on its own merits, we don't need to pay a licence fee to fund Eastenders or Match of the Day or Glastonbury or almost all of the BBC's programming. If people want to subscribe to that, let them.
They tell us that the probability of death for all of us is 1. We are all going to die. You can not halt, cancel, or prevent death - only postpone it.
I believe we all have only one life and its up to us to make the most of it. I would rather a life spent well in liberty than one with death postponed but subjugated to slavery or authoritarianism.
How is that hypocritical or inconsistent?
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/services-collapsing-usaid-cuts-health-contracts-worldwide-2025-02-27/
I support the victim in fighting back, whether that victim be Ukraine or Israel.
It's also worth pointing out that a good chunk of our "aid budget" is actually diverted into housing asylum seakers in this country, not spent on humanitarian assistance abroad. Off the top of my head I think it will be about half of it once the cuts take effect.
Here’s reporting by the AP: https://apnews.com/article/israel-syria-druze-military-clashes-e1d6da3cc97d121de161699d1aca61e3 There was a minor event in Jaramana and Israel are using this as an excuse to invade swathes of Syria.
If they're genuinely a charity just providing a service, then that wouldn't harm them.
https://x.com/ShalomLipner/status/1895912818396053897
Not as naïve as the individual who claimed with a straight face that Israel is not at war with Syria. Who was that again?
1. The armed forces of the Russian Federation are so weak that a broken failed state that's a quarter of the size can, if supplied with endless amounts of money and weapons, inflict a stinging defeat of such magnitude that the invaders will be repelled and the Russian military threat will be neutralised in perpetuity.
2. The armed forces of the Russian Federation are so strong that the UK must embark on a socially ruinous program of rearmament or the double headed eagle, twice imperially crowned will be flying over Piccadilly Circus by next (Orthodox) Christmas.
A person saved by Tory aid doesn’t count, because it was malevolent, racist scum aid.
A person saved by Progressive Government aid saves the world entire.