Sorry if already posted, but this is a quite interesting piece of ChatGPT psychology on the Trump/Zelensky disaster. That's what happens when you meet a narcissistic psychopath and his sidekick:
Conclusion Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelensky into accepting terms beneficial to the US but potentially fatal for Ukraine. 1. Blaming the victim for their own situation Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering. 2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’ Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights. 3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’ Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender. 4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’ 5. Devaluing the victims of war “If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to strike again. 6. Dominance tactics Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate. 7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’ Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged. 8. Projection and distortion of reality Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky. 9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion. 10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.
ChatGPT writes what you want it to write.
It's an interesting information gathering and summary tool (as long as it’s caveated for accuracy, as it does itself). It should not be used to draw conclusions that it's not capable of drawing.
I always thought ChatGPT isn’t uploaded with recent internet and couldn’t comment on topical events?
Anyhow, PB’ers who were here this morning already witnessed a superlative demonstration of where a combination of AI and sub-par human intelligence can take you. It wasn’t pretty.
The paid ChatGPT versions have access to the current internet. The rest has up to 2 years ago.
Specifically: ChatGPT can search the internet to find more recent information. Perplexity and Grok can also do this, while Claude cannot.
Personally, I now self host Open WebUI and plug that into Groq on the backend. (I also plug it into OpenAI and OpenRouter.)
This means that (a) I get access to all the leading models, (b) they typically run a lot faster (particularly the ones hosted on Groq), (c) all models get access to the web, and (d) it costs me maybe $10/month, which is a massive saving on what I'd pay if I wanted access to Perplexity + DeepSeek + Anthropic + OpenAI.
Sod those WASPI women, it is surely the United faithful that need some compensation and consideration for unexpected and brutal disappointments. £20k a head seems light for the trauma we have had to endure. This is beyond depressing and I am getting beyond depressed. Help.
It could be worse - my EA’s partner just got sacked from MK Dons
What is an EA
Executive Assistant, the new job title for Secretary.
The American word. Hopefully one of the fallouts from last Friday will be less US biz-speak and more good British stuff like “close of play” - to my knowledge the only British sporting metaphor to have made it into day to day American jargon,
I had to Google "PTO" when someone used it on Slack at my last company which had a big American and Irish contingent. Just couldn't figure it out.
Power Take-Off
Pacific Theater of Operations. (WW2.)
Acronyms are dangerous, in the hands of fools.
DOGE just defunded a load of research into Point of Care healthcare, as their trawl identified ‘POC’ as the wokeist ‘People of Color’.
So as I see it when there is no deal and no ceasefire then PB en masse will be high fiving and celebrating a huge victory.
(PS: there will be a deal.)
A good deal is ideal, but no deal is better than a bad deal.
And the only way to get a good deal is to be prepared to accept walking away with no deal.
You should have learnt that lesson five years ago.
It's great fun playing with the lives of thousands of people you don't know, isn't it.
He's not playing with anything, this same argument was made 3 years ago for crying out loud. For one thing advising Ukraine to concede its territory is also playing with the lives of thousands by submitting them to Russian rule forever. But more fundamentally it's deferring to whether Ukraine and its people feel the cost of continuing is worth it and supporting them if they do.
Reasonable people may differ about that position, but the 'playing with lives' argument is as silly as the other one from 3 years ago 'hurr hurr, I don't see you going on the front line'.
There is no plan anywhere to do what the PB Ukraine ultras want and are advocating.
Despite the constant whining on here, all that is being talked about is more of the same of the last three years.
Now, it has long been my position that Ukraine should stop fighting when Ukraine wants to stop fighting. But the very controlled aid it has been getting is about to become further restricted. So Zelensky must navigate within those constraints and I have no doubt that he will and a deal will be done.
More of the same is the right thing to do.
The UK alone is richer than Russia.
The UK and Europe and other assorted allies are considerably wealthier than Russia. We can continue more of the same with or without America.
So what do we think Starmer's plan will be. Invasion of Russia or ceasefire somewhere along today's positions.
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?
Not for anyone who has been paying attention for the last decade
Well given that you seem to think that's what you've been doing, perhaps you will favour us with an explanation of how demographically challenged Russia, having achieved all its territorial ambitions, is going to slaughter 200,000+ innocents.
Historically, conquering armies have had little trouble in massacring civilians.
In Ukraine, we have detailed, criminal case grade evidence of murders, expulsions and kidnapping of children in the areas occupied by Russia. En masse.9
In addition, the original plans for the Russian invasion were captured. They included mass arrests of the political and intellectual classes, as part of a plan to eliminate the idea of Ukraine as a separate state to Russia, culturally.
So you need to explain why you think that the Russians would behave differently in any areas of the Ukraine they conquer from now, to the way they behaved (and planned to behave) in those they have conquered.
I can well believe that they plan to do all those horrible things. But none of them amount to killing hundreds of thousands, or anything like. That's why I asked for an explanation, and why I wasn't surprised not to get one.
May be we can work to the internationally accepted definition of “genocide” rather than the pretendy straw man made up by a Russian sympathising conspiracy theorist such as yourself?
Maybe you could actually READ you daft fuckwit - I was asking for John Lilburne's explanation of his supposition that hundreds of thousands would be killed if Ukraine surrendered. Genocide wasn't mentioned.
It was in the other post line to which you originally replied on. But of course truth doesn’t matter to you. Just your master’s bidding.
This conversation is showing you up to be a complete loon. I questioned a claim that Putin would slaughter hundreds of thousands post-"surrender". Now I am apparently twisting the meaning of genocide by using the frames of reference given in the original post?
As for 'my master's bidding' - I don't have a master, and that allows me to speak as I find. Perhaps you should think about who has benefitted you, and how that has informed your own viewpoint, because your above post reads like classic projection to me.
The original post that I replied to - and where you responded to me - talked about genocide and you responded with a straw man on 200,000+ deaths
I know that you have consistently parroted Russian propaganda lines from MH17 onward. But I forget you are a truth seeker who treats all statements by western governments with scepticism. And yet, somehow, you always end up sharing the same position as the Russians.
But you’re right. I’ve no evidence that you are paid by the Russians. May be you are just a fool instead.
Dear God, This was the post I replied to:
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.
200,000+ is the minimum number that that comment could have been referring to. So it wasn't any kind of 'straw man' - it was a conservative summation of the statement I took issue with.
Did you read the Wikipedia article I posted? Or do you regard it as anti-Russian propaganda?
No, sorry, I was too busy defending myself from accusations of redefining genocide and making straw men for numbers that you had put forward. I can't see it in the thread, so if you wish to repost it, I'll read it.
Russians. It's what they do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes. Along with a prediction that what the Russians will do to Ukrainian intelligentsia if they win will look rather like Katyń
Sure. The streak of brutality that runs through Russian culture predates the Soviets - it even predates Peter the Great. I know that. I am not actually defending the invasion (I never have) or suggesting that Putin has "peaceful intentions". I took took issue with your statement because I see Russia killing 200,000 as a consequence of a ceasefire (or Ukrainian surrender as you put it) as extremely unlikely.
Russia can already (and does) kill people within the Ukrainian territory it holds. I see peace as making such killings less likely, due to such events not being camouflaged by the fog of war. I can certainly see opponents of Russia being targeted, but I would also imagine that they would be allowed to depart Russian-held territory as part of the peace deal (in exchange for those loyal to Russia being permitted to leave Ukrainian-held territory). So all in all, I see less Ukrainian people dying at the hands of Russia as a result of a peace deal, rather than more.
I can't share your optimism.
I think it's a fairly dispassionate analysis.
Indeed. Just wrong. The Russians will commit even more genocide in whatever part of Ukraine they occupy after peace is declared
Sure. But you offer no convincing arguments as to why they might do this.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Beth Rigby of Sky reporting that as we are not In the EU it gives Starmer the space to negotiate with Trump and Starmer is an unexpected peacemaker
Brexit dividend !!!!
Oh behave. Everyone seems to be over egging the Brexit bonus cake, and that is Farage's only contribution to date. There hasn't been a ceasefire and Trump is unreliable. Starmer has achieved nothing yet.
1. Europe needs to financially support the Ukraine war effort on the basis the US is out 2. It needs to spend some of its own money and use those frozen Russian assets, not the interest, the assets, neatly ensuring Russia remains broke post war 3. Most of the basics of what Ukraine needs can be sourced internationally. The EU spent far too long talking about its own defence industry which couldnt supply enough whilst it should have been going elsewhere to get supplies. It eventually did but it was late and the amounts in that particular plan were not enough 4. It needs to pony up a large additional amount of cash, say 100billion over 3 years and offer it to buy US defence goods, particularly in the area of force multiplication where the best kit tends to be US, and dare the US government to say no. 5. It needs to open its stores and empty them to Ukraine because, believe me, there is plenty still there. 6. Offer a rare earth deal to Ukraine because these assets are just as important to Europe as they are to the US, particularly the US defence industry.... 7. Stop fucking about and just do it
The direct Russian military threat, as evidenced by Ukraine isnt quite as mighty as it looks. The Europeans have time to build their own defence whilst giving full whack to Ukraine now.
Will they do it? Probably not, because for all Trumps arseholishness and the fact he is in Russia's pocket, he is right on one thing. Europe freeloaded off the US security umbrella for decades.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Complain to the mods, that is what they are for. Ask for a ban.
Sod those WASPI women, it is surely the United faithful that need some compensation and consideration for unexpected and brutal disappointments. £20k a head seems light for the trauma we have had to endure. This is beyond depressing and I am getting beyond depressed. Help.
It could be worse - my EA’s partner just got sacked from MK Dons
What is an EA
Executive Assistant, the new job title for Secretary.
The American word. Hopefully one of the fallouts from last Friday will be less US biz-speak and more good British stuff like “close of play” - to my knowledge the only British sporting metaphor to have made it into day to day American jargon,
I had to Google "PTO" when someone used it on Slack at my last company which had a big American and Irish contingent. Just couldn't figure it out.
Power Take-Off
Pacific Theater of Operations. (WW2.)
Acronyms are dangerous, in the hands of fools.
DOGE just defunded a load of research into Point of Care healthcare, as their trawl identified ‘POC’ as the wokeist ‘People of Color’.
They can be helpful though. Its obvious to anyone that Dodgey is an apposite acronym for Musk's vandals.
Beth Rigby of Sky reporting that as we are not In the EU it gives Starmer the space to negotiate with Trump and Starmer is an unexpected peacemaker
Brexit dividend !!!!
There's a secondary benefit too in that if also gives Macron cover to ignore Brussels because The UK is only willing to work directly with France, not via the EU. This crisis is reshaping the European alliance and I think Brussels is realising it, hence their frankly idiotic threat to cut off UK trade if we sign a trade deal with the US. They've realised that the UK centre of gravity post Brexit looks wildly different that what they had anticipated and that without the UK in the tent it makes them small and easy to ignore, even by EU members.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
TOPPING seems to be one of the few who is asking what ending the war means in practice.
He might be asking, but he's certainly not volunteering much.
I can't call what people involved will be willing to give up. I do know however that all parties will need to be pragmatic.
Which simple admission is already hugely more insightful than the wishful thinking on display by most of PB today.
It seems obvious to me that any deal is going to see Ukraine lose territory. Is this controversial?
No.
Where it becomes… interesting… is that a win for Russia (Putin) involves taking about half of Ukraine including the entire coastline.
So there cannot be a peace deal until that happens. Which means that Ukraine must be bought to its knees first. For Peace.
People seem to be missing the (frankly obvious) point that accepting a ceasefire/peace deal in which some of Ukraine remains occupied is not the same thing as conceding that it ceases to be Ukraine.
Beth Rigby of Sky reporting that as we are not In the EU it gives Starmer the space to negotiate with Trump and Starmer is an unexpected peacemaker
Brexit dividend !!!!
Oh behave. Everyone seems to be over egging the Brexit bonus cake, and that is Farage's only contribution to date. There hasn't been a ceasefire and Trump is unreliable. Starmer has achieved nothing yet.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
Highlighting in bold as a way to indicate which bit of a post you're responding to as been a PB staple for ages.
1. Europe needs to financially support the Ukraine war effort on the basis the US is out 2. It needs to spend some of its own money and use those frozen Russian assets, not the interest, the assets, neatly ensuring Russia remains broke post war 3. Most of the basics of what Ukraine needs can be sourced internationally. The EU spent far too long talking about its own defence industry which couldnt supply enough whilst it should have been going elsewhere to get supplies. It eventually did but it was late and the amounts in that particular plan were not enough 4. It needs to pony up a large additional amount of cash, say 100billion over 3 years and offer it to buy US defence goods, particularly in the area of force multiplication where the best kit tends to be US, and dare the US government to say no. 5. It needs to open its stores and empty them to Ukraine because, believe me, there is plenty still there. 6. Offer a rare earth deal to Ukraine because these assets are just as important to Europe as they are to the US, particularly the US defence industry.... 7. Stop fucking about and just do it
The direct Russian military threat, as evidenced by Ukraine isnt quite as mighty as it looks. The Europeans have time to build their own defence whilst giving full whack to Ukraine now.
Will they do it? Probably not, because for all Trumps arseholishness and the fact he is in Russia's pocket, he is right on one thing. Europe freeloaded off the US security umbrella for decades.
Trump will hate 6. But - art of the deal.
Otherwise, spot on.
2 isn’t happening, as a lot of EU members think confiscating the Russian assets might destabilise the European financial system. That might change in due course, but probably not any time soon.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Complain to the mods, that is what they are for. Ask for a ban.
I will never flag or ask the moderators to ban anyone
That is a matter entirely for the moderators and anyone asking for such disrespect the moderators
1. Europe needs to financially support the Ukraine war effort on the basis the US is out 2. It needs to spend some of its own money and use those frozen Russian assets, not the interest, the assets, neatly ensuring Russia remains broke post war 3. Most of the basics of what Ukraine needs can be sourced internationally. The EU spent far too long talking about its own defence industry which couldnt supply enough whilst it should have been going elsewhere to get supplies. It eventually did but it was late and the amounts in that particular plan were not enough 4. It needs to pony up a large additional amount of cash, say 100billion over 3 years and offer it to buy US defence goods, particularly in the area of force multiplication where the best kit tends to be US, and dare the US government to say no. 5. It needs to open its stores and empty them to Ukraine because, believe me, there is plenty still there. 6. Offer a rare earth deal to Ukraine because these assets are just as important to Europe as they are to the US, particularly the US defence industry.... 7. Stop fucking about and just do it
The direct Russian military threat, as evidenced by Ukraine isnt quite as mighty as it looks. The Europeans have time to build their own defence whilst giving full whack to Ukraine now.
Will they do it? Probably not, because for all Trumps arseholishness and the fact he is in Russia's pocket, he is right on one thing. Europe freeloaded off the US security umbrella for decades.
What do you mean by "force multiplication"? What are you suggesting we buy from the US?
Long range artillery, strategic & tactical ISR and air to ground weaponry whch will of course find it way across the Polish norder to Ukraine. Ukraine has a manpower issue and has been remarkably slow (or kind depending on how you want to see it) in its mobilisation strategy. The gap vis a vis Russia is acute so it needs all the ability it can get to narrow that gap through knowing where the threats and weak spots of its enemy are, manage its responses and have the ability to break enemy formations before they even get to the front and destroying the Command & Control structure
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Complain to the mods, that is what they are for. Ask for a ban.
I will never flag or ask the moderators to ban anyone
That is a matter entirely for the moderators and anyone asking for such disrespect the moderators
How have I disrespected the mods?
Fill your boots. If you are offended you should put your money where your mouth is and demand the ban. No skin off my nose.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
Highlighting in bold as a way to indicate which bit of a post you're responding to as been a PB staple for ages.
Yes, but in this case the point was pretty clear, I think.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
"Fixed that for you" when editing a comment and putting the edit in bold is a very long-standing meme of expressing what you mean, nothing unreasonable about it. The bit in bold is the edit, that's the whole point.
Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?
They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.
I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
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.
They are at war, yes. Ceasefire is meaningless, just ask the Ukrainians.
Syria is now under the control of what was a formerly proscribed terrorist organisation that has been nihilistic towards Israel and in favour of Israel's destruction. If grabbing land from their enemy they're at war with aids their survival, then good for them!
It’s a ceasefire that’s held for, I think, longer than you’ve been alive. To dismiss it is naive.
One person was killed in Damascus and Israel are saying that justifies invasion. Netanyahu is like Trump and Putin.
Yet not a ceasefire that led to a peace treaty so the status of war is still valid.
I despise Netanyahu but the war predates him, and my birth, and the birth of almost everyone on this site.
It's a shame that the Assad regime fell, as that regime protected minorities. The present regime are ISIS adjacent, and letting out ISIS (from their SDF captors) is likely to be the next step.
And we wonder why Trump questions liberal interventionism?
Not only did Assad support ISIS, but Trump has threatened to abandon the SDF, who are the ones primarily responsible (with US help) for containing ISIS. The new government in Damascus has every reason to want ISIS defeated, unlike Assad.
Israel, for their own reasons, just want to scupper the chance of an end to the civil war in Syria.
That's a collection of statements that bear no relation to each other or to the truth.
New government in Damascus has every reason ISIS is defeated: this is just logical, as they want control over the whole of Syria.
You seem to support Assad, who helped ISIS, refused to fight them while he was doing his best to murder everyone else, and is one of the worst war criminals in the world.
The essay you link to is interesting, but many of the statements in the introduction (I have not read further) don't seem to me to bear much scrutiny. Assad is accused of "buying oil from ISIS" and "buying grain from ISIS" - but what else does one do when ISIS controls the oil fields and the grain fields? Let the population starve in the dark?
He is also accused in the intro of "attacking the moderate rebels instead of ISIS" again I'm not sure what is to be expected of someone fighting a civil war. There were many flavours of rebel in the conflict, but few of them were moderate. I don't see how Assad could have prosecuted the war differently. Driven past the moderate rebels (taking fire) to get to ISIS?
I am a lot more persuaded by the regime's early support for ISIS in Iraq, which seems likely, and just proves that one should never work through such groups, as it always comes back to bite you.
Yes, the SDF is in a perilous position, but the reason that this makes ISIS more likely to rise again is that the HTS regime, which is ideologically adjacent to ISIS, will then be left holding the keys to the ISIS prisoners. You may find this piece interesting:
I supported Assad as the least worst option. Sadly events are proving me right, again. Every time the West gets on its white charger and decides to get rid of some nasty strongman, things invariably get worse, mostly much worse. It's a lesson we seem to need to learn again and again. I would like us, in Britain if nowhere else, to sort out our own issues, and stop trying to fix the rest of the world because they don't do things the way that we would like them to.
So all of my statements were either true, or at least arguable. Rather than 'a collection of statements that bear no relation to each other or the truth'.
What is your position? It's hard to tell, but you seem to think the US should withdraw entirely from Syria, and yet you also don't want ISIS prisoners released. This is completely incoherent.
You also say 'the West gets on its white charger and decides to get rid of some nasty strong man' - as if you imagine it was the West that got rid of Assad. Is that what you think? Because that only demonstrates total ignorance about what happened in Syria. Are you really willing to support a dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of civilians while obviously not having informed yourself of the basic facts? I'm sorry but it's fucking disgusting.
I followed the early stages of the Syria conflict, and the Arab Spring more generally, very closely, from which I can say with utter confidence that such protests as there were would have got absolutely nowhere without Western and other regional support. Syria was a proxy battle between the forces of Russia and Iran on the one side and the West, Saudi Arabia and the Turks on the other. So yes, I absolutely think that the West got rid of Assad, by weakening his regime until it could not resist a sustained, organised Islamist attack. Coincidentally, the Russians and Iranians picked the 'goodies' in this round, and we picked the baddies - the goodies being a brutal Arab nationalist regime, the baddies being people who would eat you.
I wouldn't say I find your own views on the matter disgusting, but I do find them depressingly dishonest and lacking in moral courage. If you imagine yourself and your family stranded in no man's land between Assad territory and HTS territory, with enough petrol in the tank to get you to one or the other, where are you going to go? The one that you choose, should be the one that you'd wish on the people of Syria. Unless you're certifiably insane, there's only one answer.
Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?
They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.
I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.
Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?
They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.
I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.
She'll be reporting from literally inside the fight, like some sort of crazy Trojan.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
"Fixed that for you" when editing a comment and putting the edit in bold is a very long-standing meme of expressing what you mean, nothing unreasonable about it. The bit in bold is the edit, that's the whole point.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
Highlighting in bold as a way to indicate which bit of a post you're responding to as been a PB staple for ages.
Yes, but in this case the point was pretty clear, I think.
Ah I had missed that the actual text has been changed. But even then, FTFY is fair warning.
Hamburg results with results from last week's general election in Hamburg in brackets: SPD: 33.5% (22.7%) CDU: 19.8% (20.7%) Greens: 18.5% (19.3%) Left: 11.2% (14.4%) AfD: 7.5% (10.9%) Volt: 3.3% (1.5%) FDP 2.3% (4.5%) BSW 1.8% (4.0%)
Good to see pan-European party Volt doing well, though they didn't beat the 5% hurdle this time.
I assume the SPD-Greens coalition will most likely continue, though there may be some sense in an SPD-CDU coalition in terms of what they could do in the Bundesrat. Either way the SPD can dictate terms as both Greens and CDU want in.
Sorry if already posted, but this is a quite interesting piece of ChatGPT psychology on the Trump/Zelensky disaster. That's what happens when you meet a narcissistic psychopath and his sidekick:
Conclusion Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelensky into accepting terms beneficial to the US but potentially fatal for Ukraine. 1. Blaming the victim for their own situation Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering. 2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’ Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights. 3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’ Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender. 4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’ 5. Devaluing the victims of war “If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to strike again. 6. Dominance tactics Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate. 7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’ Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged. 8. Projection and distortion of reality Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky. 9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion. 10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.
ChatGPT writes what you want it to write.
It's an interesting information gathering and summary tool (as long as it’s caveated for accuracy, as it does itself). It should not be used to draw conclusions that it's not capable of drawing.
I always thought ChatGPT isn’t uploaded with recent internet and couldn’t comment on topical events?
Anyhow, PB’ers who were here this morning already witnessed a superlative demonstration of where a combination of AI and sub-par human intelligence can take you. It wasn’t pretty.
The paid ChatGPT versions have access to the current internet. The rest has up to 2 years ago.
Specifically: ChatGPT can search the internet to find more recent information. Perplexity and Grok can also do this, while Claude cannot.
Personally, I now self host Open WebUI and plug that into Groq on the backend. (I also plug it into OpenAI and OpenRouter.)
This means that (a) I get access to all the leading models, (b) they typically run a lot faster (particularly the ones hosted on Groq), (c) all models get access to the web, and (d) it costs me maybe $10/month, which is a massive saving on what I'd pay if I wanted access to Perplexity + DeepSeek + Anthropic + OpenAI.
It's a bit of work, but well worth it.
Out of curiosity - worth it for what?
I have an LLM open in a window, always.
I'm constantly using then: is [x] accurate? When did [y] happen? Read the email below, is there any element which isn't clear?
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
"Fixed that for you" when editing a comment and putting the edit in bold is a very long-standing meme of expressing what you mean, nothing unreasonable about it. The bit in bold is the edit, that's the whole point.
Eyewitnesses report large fire, explosion after apparent Ukrainian drone strike on oil refinery in Ufa, Russia, according to FSB-linked media
The Ukrainians understand that if your enemy doesn't have any fuel they don't have an economy. Worked against Germany and it'll work against Russia, too.
Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?
I don't believe it is my responsibility to report myself to the mods. BigG needs to do that for himself unless someone else is happy to flag on his behalf.
Richard is one of the few that might have convinced me to vote for Brexit.
I am glad I didn't. You would rightly be furious with me now if I had managed to do that. For me, what we have now is still miles better than what we had before but it is still far away from the ideal that I was arguing for. Whilst it suits me and I can still see a way to that ideal, or at least close to it, it would not be what I had used to persuade others and those who were at least ambivalent to Brexit but decided to take a chance would be very unhappy.
Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket
Corrected for you.
Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete
I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.
You changed my post and put it in bold
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold
"Fixed that for you" when editing a comment and putting the edit in bold is a very long-standing meme of expressing what you mean, nothing unreasonable about it. The bit in bold is the edit, that's the whole point.
It's not complicated. All that needs to happen is:
1. I start dating Margot Robbie. 2. The EU comes together and presents me with a Maserati F250 3. The King gifts me those parts of Cornwall he reigns over together with the associated rents. 4. Arsenal win the PL and CL. 5. Cricket and rugby are abolished. 6. My entire PB posting oeuvre is published as a leather bound, numbered, limited edition book by The Bodley Head, critics are ecstatic over it, and it stays in the Sunday Times best seller list for 274 weeks.
Will the US still be willing to sell arms to the UK and EU to be re-directed to Ukraine if it stops its own support?
Trump cares about money and as long as we're paying for them he literally won't care. What I'm worried about is Trump double dealing and selling to Russia via intermediaries.
Sorry if already posted, but this is a quite interesting piece of ChatGPT psychology on the Trump/Zelensky disaster. That's what happens when you meet a narcissistic psychopath and his sidekick:
Conclusion Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelensky into accepting terms beneficial to the US but potentially fatal for Ukraine. 1. Blaming the victim for their own situation Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering. 2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’ Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights. 3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’ Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender. 4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’ 5. Devaluing the victims of war “If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to strike again. 6. Dominance tactics Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate. 7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’ Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged. 8. Projection and distortion of reality Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky. 9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion. 10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.
ChatGPT writes what you want it to write.
It's an interesting information gathering and summary tool (as long as it’s caveated for accuracy, as it does itself). It should not be used to draw conclusions that it's not capable of drawing.
I always thought ChatGPT isn’t uploaded with recent internet and couldn’t comment on topical events?
Anyhow, PB’ers who were here this morning already witnessed a superlative demonstration of where a combination of AI and sub-par human intelligence can take you. It wasn’t pretty.
The paid ChatGPT versions have access to the current internet. The rest has up to 2 years ago.
Specifically: ChatGPT can search the internet to find more recent information. Perplexity and Grok can also do this, while Claude cannot.
Personally, I now self host Open WebUI and plug that into Groq on the backend. (I also plug it into OpenAI and OpenRouter.)
This means that (a) I get access to all the leading models, (b) they typically run a lot faster (particularly the ones hosted on Groq), (c) all models get access to the web, and (d) it costs me maybe $10/month, which is a massive saving on what I'd pay if I wanted access to Perplexity + DeepSeek + Anthropic + OpenAI.
It's a bit of work, but well worth it.
Out of curiosity - worth it for what?
I have an LLM open in a window, always.
I'm constantly using then: is [x] accurate? When did [y] happen? Read the email below, is there any element which isn't clear?
Those are all excellent questions to ask of the response you get from an LLM.
Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?
They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.
I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.
Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?
They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.
I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.
Will the US still be willing to sell arms to the UK and EU to be re-directed to Ukraine if it stops its own support?
Trump cares about money and as long as we're paying for them he literally won't care. What I'm worried about is Trump double dealing and selling to Russia via intermediaries.
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.
They are at war, yes. Ceasefire is meaningless, just ask the Ukrainians.
Syria is now under the control of what was a formerly proscribed terrorist organisation that has been nihilistic towards Israel and in favour of Israel's destruction. If grabbing land from their enemy they're at war with aids their survival, then good for them!
It’s a ceasefire that’s held for, I think, longer than you’ve been alive. To dismiss it is naive.
One person was killed in Damascus and Israel are saying that justifies invasion. Netanyahu is like Trump and Putin.
Yet not a ceasefire that led to a peace treaty so the status of war is still valid.
I despise Netanyahu but the war predates him, and my birth, and the birth of almost everyone on this site.
It's a shame that the Assad regime fell, as that regime protected minorities. The present regime are ISIS adjacent, and letting out ISIS (from their SDF captors) is likely to be the next step.
And we wonder why Trump questions liberal interventionism?
Not only did Assad support ISIS, but Trump has threatened to abandon the SDF, who are the ones primarily responsible (with US help) for containing ISIS. The new government in Damascus has every reason to want ISIS defeated, unlike Assad.
Israel, for their own reasons, just want to scupper the chance of an end to the civil war in Syria.
That's a collection of statements that bear no relation to each other or to the truth.
New government in Damascus has every reason ISIS is defeated: this is just logical, as they want control over the whole of Syria.
You seem to support Assad, who helped ISIS, refused to fight them while he was doing his best to murder everyone else, and is one of the worst war criminals in the world.
The essay you link to is interesting, but many of the statements in the introduction (I have not read further) don't seem to me to bear much scrutiny. Assad is accused of "buying oil from ISIS" and "buying grain from ISIS" - but what else does one do when ISIS controls the oil fields and the grain fields? Let the population starve in the dark?
He is also accused in the intro of "attacking the moderate rebels instead of ISIS" again I'm not sure what is to be expected of someone fighting a civil war. There were many flavours of rebel in the conflict, but few of them were moderate. I don't see how Assad could have prosecuted the war differently. Driven past the moderate rebels (taking fire) to get to ISIS?
I am a lot more persuaded by the regime's early support for ISIS in Iraq, which seems likely, and just proves that one should never work through such groups, as it always comes back to bite you.
Yes, the SDF is in a perilous position, but the reason that this makes ISIS more likely to rise again is that the HTS regime, which is ideologically adjacent to ISIS, will then be left holding the keys to the ISIS prisoners. You may find this piece interesting:
I supported Assad as the least worst option. Sadly events are proving me right, again. Every time the West gets on its white charger and decides to get rid of some nasty strongman, things invariably get worse, mostly much worse. It's a lesson we seem to need to learn again and again. I would like us, in Britain if nowhere else, to sort out our own issues, and stop trying to fix the rest of the world because they don't do things the way that we would like them to.
So all of my statements were either true, or at least arguable. Rather than 'a collection of statements that bear no relation to each other or the truth'.
What is your position? It's hard to tell, but you seem to think the US should withdraw entirely from Syria, and yet you also don't want ISIS prisoners released. This is completely incoherent.
You also say 'the West gets on its white charger and decides to get rid of some nasty strong man' - as if you imagine it was the West that got rid of Assad. Is that what you think? Because that only demonstrates total ignorance about what happened in Syria. Are you really willing to support a dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of civilians while obviously not having informed yourself of the basic facts? I'm sorry but it's fucking disgusting.
I followed the early stages of the Syria conflict, and the Arab Spring more generally, very closely, from which I can say with utter confidence that such protests as there were would have got absolutely nowhere without Western and other regional support. Syria was a proxy battle between the forces of Russia and Iran on the one side and the West, Saudi Arabia and the Turks on the other. So yes, I absolutely think that the West got rid of Assad, by weakening his regime until it could not resist a sustained, organised Islamist attack. Coincidentally, the Russians and Iranians picked the 'goodies' in this round, and we picked the baddies - the goodies being a brutal Arab nationalist regime, the baddies being people who would eat you.
I wouldn't say I find your own views on the matter disgusting, but I do find them depressingly dishonest and lacking in moral courage. If you imagine yourself and your family stranded in no man's land between Assad territory and HTS territory, with enough petrol in the tank to get you to one or the other, where are you going to go? The one that you choose, should be the one that you'd wish on the people of Syria. Unless you're certifiably insane, there's only one answer.
We are talking about Syria not 'the Arab Spring more generally', but nice try at moving the goalposts.
In Syria the US was a very minor player in the fight against Assad (though critical in the fight against ISIS in Syria). Turkey (and Saudi Arabia) were far more important. HTS is supported by Turkey, not the US.
I actually think this is a form of racism on your part, denying non-white people agency and pretending 'the West' are the ones deciding everything.
Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .
He should be told to go fuck himself.
Perhaps he could blame it on English being his second language and next time he’ll bring an interpreter and say apologies if my words were mis-interpreted. It’s not really a proper apology but might allow the stain on humanity and his odious sidekick enough to see him again.
Sorry if already posted, but this is a quite interesting piece of ChatGPT psychology on the Trump/Zelensky disaster. That's what happens when you meet a narcissistic psychopath and his sidekick:
Conclusion Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelensky into accepting terms beneficial to the US but potentially fatal for Ukraine. 1. Blaming the victim for their own situation Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering. 2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’ Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights. 3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’ Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender. 4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’ 5. Devaluing the victims of war “If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to strike again. 6. Dominance tactics Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate. 7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’ Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged. 8. Projection and distortion of reality Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky. 9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion. 10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.
ChatGPT writes what you want it to write.
It's an interesting information gathering and summary tool (as long as it’s caveated for accuracy, as it does itself). It should not be used to draw conclusions that it's not capable of drawing.
I always thought ChatGPT isn’t uploaded with recent internet and couldn’t comment on topical events?
Anyhow, PB’ers who were here this morning already witnessed a superlative demonstration of where a combination of AI and sub-par human intelligence can take you. It wasn’t pretty.
The paid ChatGPT versions have access to the current internet. The rest has up to 2 years ago.
Specifically: ChatGPT can search the internet to find more recent information. Perplexity and Grok can also do this, while Claude cannot.
Personally, I now self host Open WebUI and plug that into Groq on the backend. (I also plug it into OpenAI and OpenRouter.)
This means that (a) I get access to all the leading models, (b) they typically run a lot faster (particularly the ones hosted on Groq), (c) all models get access to the web, and (d) it costs me maybe $10/month, which is a massive saving on what I'd pay if I wanted access to Perplexity + DeepSeek + Anthropic + OpenAI.
It's a bit of work, but well worth it.
Out of curiosity - worth it for what?
I have an LLM open in a window, always.
I'm constantly using then: is [x] accurate? When did [y] happen? Read the email below, is there any element which isn't clear?
Ok thanks. For work or play? Care to offer any examples?
Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?
I don't believe it is my responsibility to report myself to the mods. BigG needs to do that for himself unless someone else is happy to flag on his behalf.
Isn't the first rule of ban club to never talk about ban club?
Off topic, but the analysis might cheer some of you: A careful analysis found that moderate House candidates did better than extremists:
"On average, among Democratic House incumbents running for reelection, the centrist New Democrats won with slightly more impressive deviations from what should have happened than did the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The centrist-conservative Blue Dogs’ margins were even more impressive. In the Republican Party, meanwhile, incumbent members of the right-wing Freedom Caucus enjoyed substantially less impressive margins than the more moderate Main Street Partnership.
(This finding is consistent with theory, and with other studies. One reason why I call him the Loser is because his extreme stands have, so clearly, hurt the Republican Party, net. As I expected.
It would be interesting to see a similar study of other nations, especially the UK.)
Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?
I don't believe it is my responsibility to report myself to the mods. BigG needs to do that for himself unless someone else is happy to flag on his behalf.
Isn't the first rule of ban club to never talk about ban club?
Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .
He should be told to go fuck himself.
Perhaps he could blame it on English being his second language and next time he’ll bring an interpreter and say apologies if my words were mis-interpreted. It’s not really a proper apology but might allow the stain on humanity and his odious sidekick enough to see him again.
He should announce that he has accepted Vance's apology and gratitude for destroying ten thousands Russian tanks.
Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .
That would only embolden him.
What worries me about the European response is that they seem to think this was all a misunderstanding, that they can find a way to smooth things over and bring the US back onside and supporting Ukraine.
In my view it is a complete misreading of the situation. Trump and Vance do not want to support Ukraine, and they engineered what we saw in the White House as part of a strategy to win US public support for a policy of abandoning Ukraine, blaming Zelenskyy for it, and thereby not being blamed for a Russian victory in the way that Biden took the blame for the fall of Kabul.
Thus all this diplomacy that Starmer is being lauded for is a great big waste of time. Europe could still get its act together to put Ukraine into a stronger position, but I fear that they can't quite accept the awful reality of the situation, and their denial will lead them to pursue a fruitless attempt to win Trump round.
Comments
DOGE just defunded a load of research into Point of Care healthcare, as their trawl identified ‘POC’ as the wokeist ‘People of Color’.
Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised
If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete
They cancelled biodiversity projects, cos their CTRL F algorithm flagged *diversity
Otherwise, spot on.
I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.
Indeed, I think the present team is worse than then !!!!!
Eyewitnesses report large fire, explosion after apparent Ukrainian drone strike on oil refinery in Ufa, Russia, according to FSB-linked media
That might change in due course, but probably not any time soon.
Defence spending is set to rise, though.
That is a matter entirely for the moderators and anyone asking for such disrespect the moderators
Fill your boots. If you are offended you should put your money where your mouth is and demand the ban. No skin off my nose.
Or is she just talking shit ?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/FTFY
I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.
I wouldn't say I find your own views on the matter disgusting, but I do find them depressingly dishonest and lacking in moral courage. If you imagine yourself and your family stranded in no man's land between Assad territory and HTS territory, with enough petrol in the tank to get you to one or the other, where are you going to go? The one that you choose, should be the one that you'd wish on the people of Syria. Unless you're certifiably insane, there's only one answer.
I could do with spending less time on here.
SPD: 33.5% (22.7%)
CDU: 19.8% (20.7%)
Greens: 18.5% (19.3%)
Left: 11.2% (14.4%)
AfD: 7.5% (10.9%)
Volt: 3.3% (1.5%)
FDP 2.3% (4.5%)
BSW 1.8% (4.0%)
Good to see pan-European party Volt doing well, though they didn't beat the 5% hurdle this time.
I assume the SPD-Greens coalition will most likely continue, though there may be some sense in an SPD-CDU coalition in terms of what they could do in the Bundesrat. Either way the SPD can dictate terms as both Greens and CDU want in.
I'm constantly using then: is [x] accurate? When did [y] happen? Read the email below, is there any element which isn't clear?
I have made my point and hopefully it was fair
I do not want or seek anything more over this matter, nor any apology as that is unnecessary
I do not like however that posters should be flagged or banned as that is not the place for anyone other than the moderators
I would not like the responsibility for that.
1. I start dating Margot Robbie.
2. The EU comes together and presents me with a Maserati F250
3. The King gifts me those parts of Cornwall he reigns over together with the associated rents.
4. Arsenal win the PL and CL.
5. Cricket and rugby are abolished.
6. My entire PB posting oeuvre is published as a leather bound, numbered, limited edition book by The Bodley Head, critics are ecstatic over it, and it stays in the Sunday Times best seller list for 274 weeks.
Shouldn't "smelly" also have been in bold?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY
I really need to rewatch them all.
Trump never keeps his word and shafts everyone that he deals with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wick,_Vale_of_Glamorgan
Zelenskyy will always tower over the narcissistic and bullying Trump
In Syria the US was a very minor player in the fight against Assad (though critical in the fight against ISIS in Syria). Turkey (and Saudi Arabia) were far more important. HTS is supported by Turkey, not the US.
I actually think this is a form of racism on your part, denying non-white people agency and pretending 'the West' are the ones deciding everything.
"On average, among Democratic House incumbents running for reelection, the centrist New Democrats won with slightly more impressive deviations from what should have happened than did the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The centrist-conservative Blue Dogs’ margins were even more impressive. In the Republican Party, meanwhile, incumbent members of the right-wing Freedom Caucus enjoyed substantially less impressive margins than the more moderate Main Street Partnership.
At the extremes, this pattern was even stronger."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/02/25/2024-election-moderate-candidate-voters/
(This finding is consistent with theory, and with other studies. One reason why I call him the Loser is because his extreme stands have, so clearly, hurt the Republican Party, net. As I expected.
It would be interesting to see a similar study of other nations, especially the UK.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oYOZ3IzRaf4
Alfie Tobutt
@AlfieTobutt
DAILY MAIL: The King's show of solidarity #TomorrowsPapersToday
https://x.com/AlfieTobutt/status/1896320816557765022
In my view it is a complete misreading of the situation. Trump and Vance do not want to support Ukraine, and they engineered what we saw in the White House as part of a strategy to win US public support for a policy of abandoning Ukraine, blaming Zelenskyy for it, and thereby not being blamed for a Russian victory in the way that Biden took the blame for the fall of Kabul.
Thus all this diplomacy that Starmer is being lauded for is a great big waste of time. Europe could still get its act together to put Ukraine into a stronger position, but I fear that they can't quite accept the awful reality of the situation, and their denial will lead them to pursue a fruitless attempt to win Trump round.