“The market and the economy have become hooked, become addicted, to excessive government spending and there’s going to be a detox period.”
A detox period during which government spending will be redirected under the cover of chaos to the pockets of the Trump family and a handful of favoured oligarchs. Putin can offer tips on how to do it. He probably has.
To be fair to Putin and his friends, they take a cut from selling natural resources but taxes are low.
And there's very little woke to speak of. It's a great template from Trump's pov. No wonder he's in thrall.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
Generally Russia pushing forward, particularly in the Kursk region right now. Not all bad for Ukraine as they've retaken some positions in Pokorvsk (sp?) and Torestk recently.
If you look at a big map of Ukraine overall, neither side is going anywhere fast.
The thing is that since the failed frontal assault in Zaporizhzhia oblast in 2023, Ukraine have gone back to fighting very much on the counter, as the side advancing takes heavier casualties. So, Russia grinding forward slowly at great cost has not been that indicative of Ukraine losing.
Over a lot of the front, Russia has advanced merely a few miles in the last 18 months and when they hit a place that Ukraine defend, like Chasiv Yar, they have taken a bit over half of a town slightly bigger than Lyme Regis in a year.
The advance on Pokrovsk and flanking towns is the significant exception, but even here the advance is on the scale of Stockport across country to the edge of Crewe to partially cut off free Chester, and the battle for Crewe, Sandbach and Alsager themselves is yet to commence.
Ukraine have to watch themselves in Kursk with Russia advancing in Sumy oblast to try and encircle.
But overall, unless the intelligence and weaponry changes change the balance of losses from Russian meat grinder tactics significantly, the continued attrition of slow advance (aka death let's remember) puts pressure on Russia.
@jimsciutto New: Ukrainians’ trust in Volodymyr Zelensky has risen significantly over the past month after the Ukrainian president was publicly berated by his US counterpart Donald Trump and Washington paused military aid to Kyiv.
In a poll of 1,000 Ukrainians conducted last month by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), 57% of Ukrainians said they trust Zelensky, while 37% said they did not.
But in a new poll, conducted by KIIS from February 14 to March 4, 67% of Ukrainians said they trust Zelensky – a 10% boost – while just 29% said they do not.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
That's is as maybe, but since Likud came to power in 1977, the West Bank Arabs have been treated like third class citizens in their own country.
I don't doubt it for a minute.
Israel seems to have adopted a "fuck it" strategy in its conflicts with the Arab world. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb approach. They did in 1947-8 when the Arab world went to war with them, they (Israel) began winning, so thought let's grab some land, and they have done ever since.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
Neither do many Israelis. But both sides have to compromise to break the impasse and I see American leverage as the way it could one day happen. Not a cat's chance under this administration, it must be said. They are more likely to join in bombing Gaza than even mention a two state solution.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
That's is as maybe, but since Likud came to power in 1977, the West Bank Arabs have been treated like third class citizens in their own country.
I don't doubt it for a minute.
Israel seems to have adopted a "fuck it" strategy in its conflicts with the Arab world. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb approach. They did in 1947-8 when the Arab world went to war with them, they (Israel) began winning, so thought let's grab some land, and they have done ever since.
At this point it looks more likely to become a regional hegemon than to be wiped out.
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
South Africa is being terrible, plus, to long time Farmers in the country. They are confiscating their LAND and FARMS, and MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. A bad place to be right now, and we are stopping all Federal Funding. To go a step further, any Farmer (with family!) from South Africa, seeking to flee that country for reasons of safety, will be invited into the United States of America with a rapid pathway to Citizenship. This process will begin immediately!
I can see Trump bombing South Africa if he can get all the white people out first.
Gov Sununu is an uber moderate RINO that is why and could certainly win, that tells you sod all about the rest of the midterms which will be a referendum on Trump's presidency and the impact of his tariffs on the economy in particular
There are 35 Senate seats up for grabs.
Only 7 are at all competitive. One of these is the Democrat held New Hampshire. It's quite significant for the Senate midterms if the Dems lose it.
Sununu may in some ways be "moderate" but he's 100% backing Trump since a while back AFAIK
Tillis looks like he might lose North Carolina.
The Dems should take North Carolina and Maine. They may lose New Hampshire - but however popular Sununu is, in a midterm election with an unpopular President, I just don't see it.
Gains beyond North Carolina and Maine will, however, be harder. If Sherrod Brown - who won Ohio in the last Trump midterms - were to stand again, then I suppose that could come into play. Joni Ernst in Iowa only just won last time around, so that's a possible.
And then there are Texas and Florida, but it would need to be a monumentally bad night for the Republicans for those to come into play.
With Republicans now on 53 senators , and up to 3 of them willing to vote against Trump a net Dem gain of only 1 or 2 could still make a big difference
The three who are willing to vote against Trump are: Susan Collins (who will lose at the midterms), Mitch McConnell (who probably won't stand for re-election), and Lisa Murkowski.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
South Africa is being terrible, plus, to long time Farmers in the country. They are confiscating their LAND and FARMS, and MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. A bad place to be right now, and we are stopping all Federal Funding. To go a step further, any Farmer (with family!) from South Africa, seeking to flee that country for reasons of safety, will be invited into the United States of America with a rapid pathway to Citizenship. This process will begin immediately!
I can see Trump bombing South Africa if he can get all the white people out first.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
This more or less fits in with my thumbnail view of Trump's mindset.
In geopolitics in the Americas, his heroes are from a period when the USA was obsessing about getting Canada, did buy Alaska then had a fight with Canada about the border, tried to buy Greenland, and started (McKinley) the Panama Canal.
I don't know why he would be focused on those, but he is to McKinley as some of us are to Churchill or Lloyd George. Perhaps it came down the family, or he mollified himself with history in childhood.
Since he never reads anything, has replaced all the experts who would save him from himself with mushrooms, and takes no interest in briefings, guess where he gets his dreams from?
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
There haven't been elections in almost 20 years in Gaza, so I'm not sure where your "democratically elected" line comes from.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
That's is as maybe, but since Likud came to power in 1977, the West Bank Arabs have been treated like third class citizens in their own country.
I don't doubt it for a minute.
Israel seems to have adopted a "fuck it" strategy in its conflicts with the Arab world. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb approach. They did in 1947-8 when the Arab world went to war with them, they (Israel) began winning, so thought let's grab some land, and they have done ever since.
At this point it looks more likely to become a regional hegemon than to be wiped out.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
That's is as maybe, but since Likud came to power in 1977, the West Bank Arabs have been treated like third class citizens in their own country.
I don't doubt it for a minute.
Israel seems to have adopted a "fuck it" strategy in its conflicts with the Arab world. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb approach. They did in 1947-8 when the Arab world went to war with them, they (Israel) began winning, so thought let's grab some land, and they have done ever since.
At this point it looks more likely to become a regional hegemon than to be wiped out.
What if America cuts Israel off? Unlikely but we'd have said the same until recently about the US aligning with Russia against the West.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
That's is as maybe, but since Likud came to power in 1977, the West Bank Arabs have been treated like third class citizens in their own country.
I don't doubt it for a minute.
Israel seems to have adopted a "fuck it" strategy in its conflicts with the Arab world. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb approach. They did in 1947-8 when the Arab world went to war with them, they (Israel) began winning, so thought let's grab some land, and they have done ever since.
At this point it looks more likely to become a regional hegemon than to be wiped out.
What if America cuts Israel off? Unlikely but we'd have said the same until recently about the US aligning with Russia against the West.
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
South Africa is being terrible, plus, to long time Farmers in the country. They are confiscating their LAND and FARMS, and MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. A bad place to be right now, and we are stopping all Federal Funding. To go a step further, any Farmer (with family!) from South Africa, seeking to flee that country for reasons of safety, will be invited into the United States of America with a rapid pathway to Citizenship. This process will begin immediately!
I can see Trump bombing South Africa if he can get all the white people out first.
He's kicking out Ukrainian refugees to make way for South Africans?
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
I don't think there are many on here or elsewhere that think Russia is about to collapse, though definition of what that may mean is likely to vary. Very few people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, so it is possible, even if unlikely.
I myself, through having a personal connection with Ukraine, pray for the day when Putin dies or is overthrown, though what replaces him is almost as frightening. What is essential IMO, is that Russia must not be allowed to think that they have won. Their once assumed to be mighty military has been almost thoroughly humiliated by a much smaller one.
They will no doubt try to learn from this and rearm. We need to form a new alliance of democratic powers and release the US from what is clearly too big a burden for them, the grown-up burden of leadership. They can be reinvited to such a club if they return to being a beacon of hope and freedom such as they used to be. I also pray for that day.
*Raises hand* - I'm tentatively predicting the collapse of Russia, within 20 years or so. But there's a lot can happen between now and then. Very broadly, we are much better off if we are in a position to contain and shape the Russian collapse than if we are not. And importantly, the fewer people Russia is able to kill and the less of the world economy it is able to control between now and then, the better.
Russia is currently, clearly, a major threat to Ukraine, and if it is able to conclude its war in Ukraine favourably, it will be a major threat to our allies in Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia. This strikes me as a bad outcome and I do not understand the view of those who are indifferent to it.
However, while there are good and bad outcomes for what remains of the west, there are no good outcomes for Russia. If it loses, it has lost millions of people and most of its cash reserves for nothing and its people are likely to be a bit cross. If it wins, it has expanded its empire, but a significant share of its population will be sullen and resentful. History suggests this is more likely to be an expensive burden for it than a benefit.
FWIW, my prediction is that ... after this lot ... we are likely to have a new cold war with an iron curtain along wherever the final ceasefire / armistice line turns out to be.
I have no idea when Russia will collapse ... last time it took 30-45 years, depending how the start is dated.
One (not very likely, but more charitable than the obvious) theory about Mr Trump's actions is that he is concerned about the consequences of a complete Russian collapse in terms of China getting fuller Pacific access and a big chunk of Russia than he is about the consequences of collapsing Ukraine and handing it over to be dismembered.
From a USA Govt realpolitikal view, there is some logic to it.
Yes, I've thought along those lines. If and when Russia does collapse, who picks up the pieces? One way of making sure it's not China is by doing what Putin is now. Possibly in 25 years time, the superpowers of the day (USA? China? Europe? None of them are by any means certain to still be powers in 25 years time) will be picking over the corpse of Russia like squabbling eagles over a dead elk.
Quite frankly, Britain is more likely to collapse than Russia
I hope your likelihoods don't inform your betting.
Given that Britain came within a large whisker of collapsing in 2014 - via Scottosh indy (which will return, one day) - then it's not like I am predicting something outlandish
Go listen to that David Betz podcast I linked yesterday
Ah that guy. You might also want to read his article about how Hungary is great and why Britain should not support the‘ stupid’ Ukraine war. He’s so balanced.
Yes, here's his opinion of the Ukraine war. Be a good centrist dad, and point out the bit that is insane -
"Now focusing on the Russo–Ukrainian conflict, it started a little more than two years ago. Was there any part of it in which it looked like it wasn’t going to be a stupid war?"
Betz: "No. It is paradigmatically stupid: unnecessary and unwinnable.
Moreover, it seems now obvious that the decision on the part of the West to pursue the war in the way that it has done was on the basis of a series of very flawed, even hubristic, assumptions, the primary one being that Russia was nowhere as economically strong and militarily capable as it has turned out to be."
"Can we label this war as ‘stupid’ even from a Ukrainian perspective?"
Betz: "From the Ukrainian perspective, it is a different story. But speaking from a Western perspective, with respect to the Western involvement in the Russo-Ukraine war, using Ukraine as its proxy, as essentially a meat puppet, it is a stupid war. Ukraine has been used very cynically, been ‘led up the garden path’ to use an English cliché. That’s what I’m what I’m talking about. I do think the Ukrainians are in a horrible position of having very limited, very limited choices. But they’ve been encouraged to do the stupid thing.
"They’ve been encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. It’s a country that has had something about a third to half of its population displaced abroad. Who knows if they will move back and of course, many, many thousands of their soldiers have been killed. I’m speaking primarily from the point of view of Western involvement. When it comes down to it, Ukrainians have been very badly used by the West, which will ultimately abandon them. "
Ukraine was invaded, with the intention of taking over the entire country, killing or imprisoning the leaders of society and destroying Ukrainian culture - to turn the place into a Russian province.
The Ukrainians faced an existential threat.
Since then, they have not been offered, by Russia, anything other than complete surrender.
So "encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians" is demonstrably bullshit.
Betz is a strange, idiosyncratic one. Some of his comments on Ukraine are obviously some way off reality.
But he's of the view (supported by data on the numbers of "concerns" reported to Prevent) that the "Nativists" as he calls them are a bigger threat than the Islamists, who he thinks have culminated.
The noisy rhetoric we tend to hear is nativists blaming *all* the Muslims.
Gov Sununu is an uber moderate RINO that is why and could certainly win, that tells you sod all about the rest of the midterms which will be a referendum on Trump's presidency and the impact of his tariffs on the economy in particular
There are 35 Senate seats up for grabs.
Only 7 are at all competitive. One of these is the Democrat held New Hampshire. It's quite significant for the Senate midterms if the Dems lose it.
Sununu may in some ways be "moderate" but he's 100% backing Trump since a while back AFAIK
Tillis looks like he might lose North Carolina.
The Dems should take North Carolina and Maine. They may lose New Hampshire - but however popular Sununu is, in a midterm election with an unpopular President, I just don't see it.
Gains beyond North Carolina and Maine will, however, be harder. If Sherrod Brown - who won Ohio in the last Trump midterms - were to stand again, then I suppose that could come into play. Joni Ernst in Iowa only just won last time around, so that's a possible.
And then there are Texas and Florida, but it would need to be a monumentally bad night for the Republicans for those to come into play.
With Republicans now on 53 senators , and up to 3 of them willing to vote against Trump a net Dem gain of only 1 or 2 could still make a big difference
The three who are willing to vote against Trump are: Susan Collins (who will lose at the midterms), Mitch McConnell (who probably won't stand for re-election), and Lisa Murkowski.
So that only really leaves one come 2027.
Congress needs to start earning its corn. At the moment you could be forgiven for thinking America is a country ruled by a single maniacal individual doing press conferences, signing orders and writing social media posts.
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
There are already draconian sanctions and banking sanctions in Russia, for quite some time, with little or no effect on forcing them to negotiate peace. Unless Trump has recently lifted them without telling anyone, this is just bollocks.
Gov Sununu is an uber moderate RINO that is why and could certainly win, that tells you sod all about the rest of the midterms which will be a referendum on Trump's presidency and the impact of his tariffs on the economy in particular
There are 35 Senate seats up for grabs.
Only 7 are at all competitive. One of these is the Democrat held New Hampshire. It's quite significant for the Senate midterms if the Dems lose it.
Sununu may in some ways be "moderate" but he's 100% backing Trump since a while back AFAIK
Tillis looks like he might lose North Carolina.
The Dems should take North Carolina and Maine. They may lose New Hampshire - but however popular Sununu is, in a midterm election with an unpopular President, I just don't see it.
Gains beyond North Carolina and Maine will, however, be harder. If Sherrod Brown - who won Ohio in the last Trump midterms - were to stand again, then I suppose that could come into play. Joni Ernst in Iowa only just won last time around, so that's a possible.
And then there are Texas and Florida, but it would need to be a monumentally bad night for the Republicans for those to come into play.
With Republicans now on 53 senators , and up to 3 of them willing to vote against Trump a net Dem gain of only 1 or 2 could still make a big difference
The three who are willing to vote against Trump are: Susan Collins (who will lose at the midterms), Mitch McConnell (who probably won't stand for re-election), and Lisa Murkowski.
So that only really leaves one come 2027.
So McConnell gets replaced by a Trump loyalist, Collins by a Democrat? So Dems need a net gain of 3 (including Collins) to block the most extreme Trump stuff in the Senate (50 Dems+Independents + Murkowski)? Assuming there's much left of US democracy by the end of next year...
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
I don't think there are many on here or elsewhere that think Russia is about to collapse, though definition of what that may mean is likely to vary. Very few people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, so it is possible, even if unlikely.
I myself, through having a personal connection with Ukraine, pray for the day when Putin dies or is overthrown, though what replaces him is almost as frightening. What is essential IMO, is that Russia must not be allowed to think that they have won. Their once assumed to be mighty military has been almost thoroughly humiliated by a much smaller one.
They will no doubt try to learn from this and rearm. We need to form a new alliance of democratic powers and release the US from what is clearly too big a burden for them, the grown-up burden of leadership. They can be reinvited to such a club if they return to being a beacon of hope and freedom such as they used to be. I also pray for that day.
*Raises hand* - I'm tentatively predicting the collapse of Russia, within 20 years or so. But there's a lot can happen between now and then. Very broadly, we are much better off if we are in a position to contain and shape the Russian collapse than if we are not. And importantly, the fewer people Russia is able to kill and the less of the world economy it is able to control between now and then, the better.
Russia is currently, clearly, a major threat to Ukraine, and if it is able to conclude its war in Ukraine favourably, it will be a major threat to our allies in Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia. This strikes me as a bad outcome and I do not understand the view of those who are indifferent to it.
However, while there are good and bad outcomes for what remains of the west, there are no good outcomes for Russia. If it loses, it has lost millions of people and most of its cash reserves for nothing and its people are likely to be a bit cross. If it wins, it has expanded its empire, but a significant share of its population will be sullen and resentful. History suggests this is more likely to be an expensive burden for it than a benefit.
FWIW, my prediction is that ... after this lot ... we are likely to have a new cold war with an iron curtain along wherever the final ceasefire / armistice line turns out to be.
I have no idea when Russia will collapse ... last time it took 30-45 years, depending how the start is dated.
One (not very likely, but more charitable than the obvious) theory about Mr Trump's actions is that he is concerned about the consequences of a complete Russian collapse in terms of China getting fuller Pacific access and a big chunk of Russia than he is about the consequences of collapsing Ukraine and handing it over to be dismembered.
From a USA Govt realpolitikal view, there is some logic to it.
Yes, I've thought along those lines. If and when Russia does collapse, who picks up the pieces? One way of making sure it's not China is by doing what Putin is now. Possibly in 25 years time, the superpowers of the day (USA? China? Europe? None of them are by any means certain to still be powers in 25 years time) will be picking over the corpse of Russia like squabbling eagles over a dead elk.
Quite frankly, Britain is more likely to collapse than Russia
I hope your likelihoods don't inform your betting.
Given that Britain came within a large whisker of collapsing in 2014 - via Scottosh indy (which will return, one day) - then it's not like I am predicting something outlandish
Go listen to that David Betz podcast I linked yesterday
Ah that guy. You might also want to read his article about how Hungary is great and why Britain should not support the‘ stupid’ Ukraine war. He’s so balanced.
Yes, here's his opinion of the Ukraine war. Be a good centrist dad, and point out the bit that is insane -
"Now focusing on the Russo–Ukrainian conflict, it started a little more than two years ago. Was there any part of it in which it looked like it wasn’t going to be a stupid war?"
Betz: "No. It is paradigmatically stupid: unnecessary and unwinnable.
Moreover, it seems now obvious that the decision on the part of the West to pursue the war in the way that it has done was on the basis of a series of very flawed, even hubristic, assumptions, the primary one being that Russia was nowhere as economically strong and militarily capable as it has turned out to be."
"Can we label this war as ‘stupid’ even from a Ukrainian perspective?"
Betz: "From the Ukrainian perspective, it is a different story. But speaking from a Western perspective, with respect to the Western involvement in the Russo-Ukraine war, using Ukraine as its proxy, as essentially a meat puppet, it is a stupid war. Ukraine has been used very cynically, been ‘led up the garden path’ to use an English cliché. That’s what I’m what I’m talking about. I do think the Ukrainians are in a horrible position of having very limited, very limited choices. But they’ve been encouraged to do the stupid thing.
"They’ve been encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. It’s a country that has had something about a third to half of its population displaced abroad. Who knows if they will move back and of course, many, many thousands of their soldiers have been killed. I’m speaking primarily from the point of view of Western involvement. When it comes down to it, Ukrainians have been very badly used by the West, which will ultimately abandon them. "
The Russian invasion of Ukraine was a violation of sovereign territory and hence to be deplored. Does/did Russia think that Ukraine was really Russia West - and should be (re)claimed? No idea I suppose wiki tells me it depends on what point you push the red button to start assessing.
But the West has been pretty clear in its strategy of degrading Russia and its military capabilities over three years, short of formal hostilities using Ukraine to do so. Now, that may be the smartest thing we could have done done. Look at where we are now, Russia is bogged down and moving glacially (I say that, but I haven't kept up with the map - has anyone?).
But what has that meant for Ukraine - thousands upon thousands of deaths while the military and political big brains of the West look on, throwing just enough but not too much materiel at them.
Perhaps there is no other way but it does seem a bit, er, stupid.
The Russian war aims (according to the Russian government) was the conquest of the entire Ukraine, elimination of its government and then a massive Russification program to turn it into a Russian province.
The latest Russian demand is half the country, all the coast line, and a puppet government in what is left.
Where, between the day of the invasion and now, could the Ukranians have got anything other than a demand for their surrender?
The alt.right view somehow translates that as Ukraine is the aggressor and/or a quasi-racist belief that Russia’s soldiers are ubermenschen..
Towards the start of this war, there was an article about the mothers of Russian conscripts complaining about the beastings - torture, in reality - that many recruits suffered. This was from before the war.
The demented brutality of the army was noted through Soviet times. Resulting in a non-trivial death rate among conscripts.
According to my stepmother, the Airforce was relatively sane. A Russian work colleague who worked on Backfire bombers said that it was a bit of a refuge - people would pull strings to do their conscription there.
That reminds me of a joke an American military friend of mine told me about the difference between the army and the air force.
A soldier gets deployed to a place and complained that he had to wake up at 4 am every day, do two hours of drill, struggle through a swamp and get eaten alive by mosquitoes, get shot at and then go on watch for twelve hours.
An airman gets deployed to a place and complained that there was no air-conditioning.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
There haven't been elections in almost 20 years in Gaza, so I'm not sure where your "democratically elected" line comes from.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
This will be darkly amusing if Trump's isolationist USA is the one that is isolated from Five Eyes.
8/ Specifically, three issues have been raised: "He wanted to eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
This more or less fits in with my thumbnail view of Trump's mindset.
In geopolitics in the Americas, his heroes are from a period when the USA was obsessing about getting Canada, did buy Alaska then had a fight with Canada about the border, tried to buy Greenland, and started (McKinley) the Panama Canal.
I don't know why he would be focused on those, but he is to McKinley as some of us are to Churchill or Lloyd George. Perhaps it came down the family, or he mollified himself with history in childhood.
Since he never reads anything, has replaced all the experts who would save him from himself with mushrooms, and takes no interest in briefings, guess where he gets his dreams from?
The 1890 tariffs were intended to force/encourage Canada to become part of the US. They had the opposite effect.
So Trump blames Ukraine for not wanting peace, blames them for the war, punishes them by cutting off weapons and intelligence and his proxies trying to force out its president, and he is now acting surprised Russia has been taking advantage?
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
So Trump blames Ukraine for not wanting peace, blames them for the war, punishes them by cutting of weapons and intelligence and his proxies trying to force out its president, and he is now acting surprised Russia has been taking advantage?
Because his bestie, Putin, told Trump he was a pacifist and only wanted everyone to join hands and sing lullabies.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
This will be darkly amusing if Trump's isolationist USA is the one that is isolated from Five Eyes.
8/ Specifically, three issues have been raised: "He wanted to eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
Wasn't one of the Snowden revelations that Britain and the US use intelligence sharing to get around their respective laws on spying on their own citizens? A breakdown in that arrangement could affect counter-terrorism or force a change in the law.
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
You should be pleased that we’re owning responsibility for our defence, rather than relying on the USA.
Its just classic goalpost switching. The idea russia is a threat even if not imminently about to invade the west is something several people pretend to be confused by despite there being nothing illogical about it.
So Trump blames Ukraine for not wanting peace, blames them for the war, punishes them by cutting off weapons and intelligence and his proxies trying to force out its president, and he is now acting surprised Russia has been taking advantage?
Unless something disastrous happen to him, or he calms down as a result of events we've got four more years of this (less two months). And if something disastrous does happen the replacement is Vance. Not a happy prospect for the world.
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
I don't think there are many on here or elsewhere that think Russia is about to collapse, though definition of what that may mean is likely to vary. Very few people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, so it is possible, even if unlikely.
I myself, through having a personal connection with Ukraine, pray for the day when Putin dies or is overthrown, though what replaces him is almost as frightening. What is essential IMO, is that Russia must not be allowed to think that they have won. Their once assumed to be mighty military has been almost thoroughly humiliated by a much smaller one.
They will no doubt try to learn from this and rearm. We need to form a new alliance of democratic powers and release the US from what is clearly too big a burden for them, the grown-up burden of leadership. They can be reinvited to such a club if they return to being a beacon of hope and freedom such as they used to be. I also pray for that day.
*Raises hand* - I'm tentatively predicting the collapse of Russia, within 20 years or so. But there's a lot can happen between now and then. Very broadly, we are much better off if we are in a position to contain and shape the Russian collapse than if we are not. And importantly, the fewer people Russia is able to kill and the less of the world economy it is able to control between now and then, the better.
Russia is currently, clearly, a major threat to Ukraine, and if it is able to conclude its war in Ukraine favourably, it will be a major threat to our allies in Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia. This strikes me as a bad outcome and I do not understand the view of those who are indifferent to it.
However, while there are good and bad outcomes for what remains of the west, there are no good outcomes for Russia. If it loses, it has lost millions of people and most of its cash reserves for nothing and its people are likely to be a bit cross. If it wins, it has expanded its empire, but a significant share of its population will be sullen and resentful. History suggests this is more likely to be an expensive burden for it than a benefit.
FWIW, my prediction is that ... after this lot ... we are likely to have a new cold war with an iron curtain along wherever the final ceasefire / armistice line turns out to be.
I have no idea when Russia will collapse ... last time it took 30-45 years, depending how the start is dated.
One (not very likely, but more charitable than the obvious) theory about Mr Trump's actions is that he is concerned about the consequences of a complete Russian collapse in terms of China getting fuller Pacific access and a big chunk of Russia than he is about the consequences of collapsing Ukraine and handing it over to be dismembered.
From a USA Govt realpolitikal view, there is some logic to it.
Yes, I've thought along those lines. If and when Russia does collapse, who picks up the pieces? One way of making sure it's not China is by doing what Putin is now. Possibly in 25 years time, the superpowers of the day (USA? China? Europe? None of them are by any means certain to still be powers in 25 years time) will be picking over the corpse of Russia like squabbling eagles over a dead elk.
Quite frankly, Britain is more likely to collapse than Russia
I hope your likelihoods don't inform your betting.
Given that Britain came within a large whisker of collapsing in 2014 - via Scottosh indy (which will return, one day) - then it's not like I am predicting something outlandish
Go listen to that David Betz podcast I linked yesterday
Ah that guy. You might also want to read his article about how Hungary is great and why Britain should not support the‘ stupid’ Ukraine war. He’s so balanced.
Yes, here's his opinion of the Ukraine war. Be a good centrist dad, and point out the bit that is insane -
"Now focusing on the Russo–Ukrainian conflict, it started a little more than two years ago. Was there any part of it in which it looked like it wasn’t going to be a stupid war?"
Betz: "No. It is paradigmatically stupid: unnecessary and unwinnable.
Moreover, it seems now obvious that the decision on the part of the West to pursue the war in the way that it has done was on the basis of a series of very flawed, even hubristic, assumptions, the primary one being that Russia was nowhere as economically strong and militarily capable as it has turned out to be."
"Can we label this war as ‘stupid’ even from a Ukrainian perspective?"
Betz: "From the Ukrainian perspective, it is a different story. But speaking from a Western perspective, with respect to the Western involvement in the Russo-Ukraine war, using Ukraine as its proxy, as essentially a meat puppet, it is a stupid war. Ukraine has been used very cynically, been ‘led up the garden path’ to use an English cliché. That’s what I’m what I’m talking about. I do think the Ukrainians are in a horrible position of having very limited, very limited choices. But they’ve been encouraged to do the stupid thing.
"They’ve been encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. It’s a country that has had something about a third to half of its population displaced abroad. Who knows if they will move back and of course, many, many thousands of their soldiers have been killed. I’m speaking primarily from the point of view of Western involvement. When it comes down to it, Ukrainians have been very badly used by the West, which will ultimately abandon them. "
The Russian invasion of Ukraine was a violation of sovereign territory and hence to be deplored. Does/did Russia think that Ukraine was really Russia West - and should be (re)claimed? No idea I suppose wiki tells me it depends on what point you push the red button to start assessing.
But the West has been pretty clear in its strategy of degrading Russia and its military capabilities over three years, short of formal hostilities using Ukraine to do so. Now, that may be the smartest thing we could have done done. Look at where we are now, Russia is bogged down and moving glacially (I say that, but I haven't kept up with the map - has anyone?).
But what has that meant for Ukraine - thousands upon thousands of deaths while the military and political big brains of the West look on, throwing just enough but not too much materiel at them.
Perhaps there is no other way but it does seem a bit, er, stupid.
Putin penned an article on the first day of the invasion called "The Arrival of Russia and the New World" (Приход России и нового мира), which basically said that Ukraine is part of Russia. When the invasion got bogged down, the article was pulled.
So, yes, I think we can conclude that Russia's plan -initially at least- was to reabsorb Ukraine.
That doesn't look very likely now. But with over 600,000 casualties (which is equivalent to 15% of all Russian men between 18 and 24), one might equally ask the question, why are they still doing it?
I would also note, to be fair to the “Russia is not as strong as it looks” crowd, that the Russian front line in Ukraine collapsed not once, but twice before they finally managed to stabilise the current front lines.
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
This will be darkly amusing if Trump's isolationist USA is the one that is isolated from Five Eyes.
8/ Specifically, three issues have been raised: "He wanted to eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
Wasn't one of the Snowden revelations that Britain and the US use intelligence sharing to get around their respective laws on spying on their own citizens? A breakdown in that arrangement could affect counter-terrorism or force a change in the law.
Correct, yes.
I'm a little interested in why Saudi and Israel (who were seeking to normalise relations until the Gaza conflict got in the way) are reportedly involved in "reduce intelligence to the USA" conversations and if it is with the non-compromised Five Eyes members.
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
I don't think there are many on here or elsewhere that think Russia is about to collapse, though definition of what that may mean is likely to vary. Very few people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, so it is possible, even if unlikely.
I myself, through having a personal connection with Ukraine, pray for the day when Putin dies or is overthrown, though what replaces him is almost as frightening. What is essential IMO, is that Russia must not be allowed to think that they have won. Their once assumed to be mighty military has been almost thoroughly humiliated by a much smaller one.
They will no doubt try to learn from this and rearm. We need to form a new alliance of democratic powers and release the US from what is clearly too big a burden for them, the grown-up burden of leadership. They can be reinvited to such a club if they return to being a beacon of hope and freedom such as they used to be. I also pray for that day.
*Raises hand* - I'm tentatively predicting the collapse of Russia, within 20 years or so. But there's a lot can happen between now and then. Very broadly, we are much better off if we are in a position to contain and shape the Russian collapse than if we are not. And importantly, the fewer people Russia is able to kill and the less of the world economy it is able to control between now and then, the better.
Russia is currently, clearly, a major threat to Ukraine, and if it is able to conclude its war in Ukraine favourably, it will be a major threat to our allies in Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia. This strikes me as a bad outcome and I do not understand the view of those who are indifferent to it.
However, while there are good and bad outcomes for what remains of the west, there are no good outcomes for Russia. If it loses, it has lost millions of people and most of its cash reserves for nothing and its people are likely to be a bit cross. If it wins, it has expanded its empire, but a significant share of its population will be sullen and resentful. History suggests this is more likely to be an expensive burden for it than a benefit.
FWIW, my prediction is that ... after this lot ... we are likely to have a new cold war with an iron curtain along wherever the final ceasefire / armistice line turns out to be.
I have no idea when Russia will collapse ... last time it took 30-45 years, depending how the start is dated.
One (not very likely, but more charitable than the obvious) theory about Mr Trump's actions is that he is concerned about the consequences of a complete Russian collapse in terms of China getting fuller Pacific access and a big chunk of Russia than he is about the consequences of collapsing Ukraine and handing it over to be dismembered.
From a USA Govt realpolitikal view, there is some logic to it.
Yes, I've thought along those lines. If and when Russia does collapse, who picks up the pieces? One way of making sure it's not China is by doing what Putin is now. Possibly in 25 years time, the superpowers of the day (USA? China? Europe? None of them are by any means certain to still be powers in 25 years time) will be picking over the corpse of Russia like squabbling eagles over a dead elk.
Quite frankly, Britain is more likely to collapse than Russia
I hope your likelihoods don't inform your betting.
Given that Britain came within a large whisker of collapsing in 2014 - via Scottosh indy (which will return, one day) - then it's not like I am predicting something outlandish
Go listen to that David Betz podcast I linked yesterday
Ah that guy. You might also want to read his article about how Hungary is great and why Britain should not support the‘ stupid’ Ukraine war. He’s so balanced.
Yes, here's his opinion of the Ukraine war. Be a good centrist dad, and point out the bit that is insane -
"Now focusing on the Russo–Ukrainian conflict, it started a little more than two years ago. Was there any part of it in which it looked like it wasn’t going to be a stupid war?"
Betz: "No. It is paradigmatically stupid: unnecessary and unwinnable.
Moreover, it seems now obvious that the decision on the part of the West to pursue the war in the way that it has done was on the basis of a series of very flawed, even hubristic, assumptions, the primary one being that Russia was nowhere as economically strong and militarily capable as it has turned out to be."
"Can we label this war as ‘stupid’ even from a Ukrainian perspective?"
Betz: "From the Ukrainian perspective, it is a different story. But speaking from a Western perspective, with respect to the Western involvement in the Russo-Ukraine war, using Ukraine as its proxy, as essentially a meat puppet, it is a stupid war. Ukraine has been used very cynically, been ‘led up the garden path’ to use an English cliché. That’s what I’m what I’m talking about. I do think the Ukrainians are in a horrible position of having very limited, very limited choices. But they’ve been encouraged to do the stupid thing.
"They’ve been encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. It’s a country that has had something about a third to half of its population displaced abroad. Who knows if they will move back and of course, many, many thousands of their soldiers have been killed. I’m speaking primarily from the point of view of Western involvement. When it comes down to it, Ukrainians have been very badly used by the West, which will ultimately abandon them. "
What is “stupid”, in terms of pure, cold-blooded, realpolitik, about bleeding Russia of men, money, and armoured vehicles? It’s what people like Kissinger, Talleyrand, Palmerston etc. would have done.
This is a case where the expedient course of action is also the morally correct course of action.
The dishonesty in the piece is to imply that Ukraine has been pushed into war by the West, against its own interests. When, in reality, Ukraine has no choice but to fight. Regardless whether the West supports them or not, they have no option in the matter.
I'd also add that he is wrong that the west has underestimated Russian economic and military strength. The reverse is true.
The was in Ukraine is one of those occasions where doing the morally right thing coincides with doing the strategically advantageous thing.
This is palpable bollocks. I know PB is not “the entire west” but it’s quite a good sample of mainstream educated western/British opinion
From month 3 of the war it was an endless stream of “Russia is collapsing”, “look at their stupid tanks”, “Putin is dying”, “any minute now the Russian economy will implode”
None of this has happened. And when some of us, like me and @topping and @Dura_Ace and @Luckyguy1983 dared to point out that Ukraine was in trouble we got called fucking appeasers and putinist shills for our pains
There has been a lot of over-optomistic prediction of Russian collapse over the years here on PB, it has to be said.
Putin's imminent death based on the evidence of his overenthusiastically botoxed facial injections was a particular high point.
Gov Sununu is an uber moderate RINO that is why and could certainly win, that tells you sod all about the rest of the midterms which will be a referendum on Trump's presidency and the impact of his tariffs on the economy in particular
There are 35 Senate seats up for grabs.
Only 7 are at all competitive. One of these is the Democrat held New Hampshire. It's quite significant for the Senate midterms if the Dems lose it.
Sununu may in some ways be "moderate" but he's 100% backing Trump since a while back AFAIK
Sununu backed Haley over Trump in the primaries is basically a Democrat in all but name on most issues anyway
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
This will be darkly amusing if Trump's isolationist USA is the one that is isolated from Five Eyes.
8/ Specifically, three issues have been raised: "He wanted to eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
Wasn't one of the Snowden revelations that Britain and the US use intelligence sharing to get around their respective laws on spying on their own citizens? A breakdown in that arrangement could affect counter-terrorism or force a change in the law.
Correct, yes.
I'm a little interested in why Saudi and Israel (who were seeking to normalise relations until the Gaza conflict got in the way) are reportedly involved in "reduce intelligence to the USA" conversations and if it is with the non-compromised Five Eyes members.
Well, they're two countries who've had most to do with Trump........
Poland is on a trajectory to overtake France as the foremost military power on the continent.
"When things settle down, Poland will be the regional superpower in Europe and will be able to dominate the local military space, far in excess of UK. " - viewcode, 2023/01/29
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
I don't think there are many on here or elsewhere that think Russia is about to collapse, though definition of what that may mean is likely to vary. Very few people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, so it is possible, even if unlikely.
I myself, through having a personal connection with Ukraine, pray for the day when Putin dies or is overthrown, though what replaces him is almost as frightening. What is essential IMO, is that Russia must not be allowed to think that they have won. Their once assumed to be mighty military has been almost thoroughly humiliated by a much smaller one.
They will no doubt try to learn from this and rearm. We need to form a new alliance of democratic powers and release the US from what is clearly too big a burden for them, the grown-up burden of leadership. They can be reinvited to such a club if they return to being a beacon of hope and freedom such as they used to be. I also pray for that day.
*Raises hand* - I'm tentatively predicting the collapse of Russia, within 20 years or so. But there's a lot can happen between now and then. Very broadly, we are much better off if we are in a position to contain and shape the Russian collapse than if we are not. And importantly, the fewer people Russia is able to kill and the less of the world economy it is able to control between now and then, the better.
Russia is currently, clearly, a major threat to Ukraine, and if it is able to conclude its war in Ukraine favourably, it will be a major threat to our allies in Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia. This strikes me as a bad outcome and I do not understand the view of those who are indifferent to it.
However, while there are good and bad outcomes for what remains of the west, there are no good outcomes for Russia. If it loses, it has lost millions of people and most of its cash reserves for nothing and its people are likely to be a bit cross. If it wins, it has expanded its empire, but a significant share of its population will be sullen and resentful. History suggests this is more likely to be an expensive burden for it than a benefit.
FWIW, my prediction is that ... after this lot ... we are likely to have a new cold war with an iron curtain along wherever the final ceasefire / armistice line turns out to be.
I have no idea when Russia will collapse ... last time it took 30-45 years, depending how the start is dated.
One (not very likely, but more charitable than the obvious) theory about Mr Trump's actions is that he is concerned about the consequences of a complete Russian collapse in terms of China getting fuller Pacific access and a big chunk of Russia than he is about the consequences of collapsing Ukraine and handing it over to be dismembered.
From a USA Govt realpolitikal view, there is some logic to it.
Yes, I've thought along those lines. If and when Russia does collapse, who picks up the pieces? One way of making sure it's not China is by doing what Putin is now. Possibly in 25 years time, the superpowers of the day (USA? China? Europe? None of them are by any means certain to still be powers in 25 years time) will be picking over the corpse of Russia like squabbling eagles over a dead elk.
Quite frankly, Britain is more likely to collapse than Russia
I hope your likelihoods don't inform your betting.
Given that Britain came within a large whisker of collapsing in 2014 - via Scottosh indy (which will return, one day) - then it's not like I am predicting something outlandish
Go listen to that David Betz podcast I linked yesterday
Ah that guy. You might also want to read his article about how Hungary is great and why Britain should not support the‘ stupid’ Ukraine war. He’s so balanced.
Yes, here's his opinion of the Ukraine war. Be a good centrist dad, and point out the bit that is insane -
"Now focusing on the Russo–Ukrainian conflict, it started a little more than two years ago. Was there any part of it in which it looked like it wasn’t going to be a stupid war?"
Betz: "No. It is paradigmatically stupid: unnecessary and unwinnable.
Moreover, it seems now obvious that the decision on the part of the West to pursue the war in the way that it has done was on the basis of a series of very flawed, even hubristic, assumptions, the primary one being that Russia was nowhere as economically strong and militarily capable as it has turned out to be."
"Can we label this war as ‘stupid’ even from a Ukrainian perspective?"
Betz: "From the Ukrainian perspective, it is a different story. But speaking from a Western perspective, with respect to the Western involvement in the Russo-Ukraine war, using Ukraine as its proxy, as essentially a meat puppet, it is a stupid war. Ukraine has been used very cynically, been ‘led up the garden path’ to use an English cliché. That’s what I’m what I’m talking about. I do think the Ukrainians are in a horrible position of having very limited, very limited choices. But they’ve been encouraged to do the stupid thing.
"They’ve been encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. It’s a country that has had something about a third to half of its population displaced abroad. Who knows if they will move back and of course, many, many thousands of their soldiers have been killed. I’m speaking primarily from the point of view of Western involvement. When it comes down to it, Ukrainians have been very badly used by the West, which will ultimately abandon them. "
What is “stupid”, in terms of pure, cold-blooded, realpolitik, about bleeding Russia of men, money, and armoured vehicles? It’s what people like Kissinger, Talleyrand, Palmerston etc. would have done.
This is a case where the expedient course of action is also the morally correct course of action.
The dishonesty in the piece is to imply that Ukraine has been pushed into war by the West, against its own interests. When, in reality, Ukraine has no choice but to fight. Regardless whether the West supports them or not, they have no option in the matter.
I'd also add that he is wrong that the west has underestimated Russian economic and military strength. The reverse is true.
The was in Ukraine is one of those occasions where doing the morally right thing coincides with doing the strategically advantageous thing.
This is palpable bollocks. I know PB is not “the entire west” but it’s quite a good sample of mainstream educated western/British opinion
From month 3 of the war it was an endless stream of “Russia is collapsing”, “look at their stupid tanks”, “Putin is dying”, “any minute now the Russian economy will implode”
None of this has happened. And when some of us, like me and @topping and @Dura_Ace and @Luckyguy1983 dared to point out that Ukraine was in trouble we got called fucking appeasers and putinist shills for our pains
There has been a lot of over-optomistic prediction of Russian collapse over the years here on PB, it has to be said.
However, when the invasion started, I think the consensus was that if Ukraine could last two weeks it would have done better than expected. Certainly no-one expected Ukraine to launch a counter invasion.
Just off a call with a Hong Kong construction magnate.
Have no doubt, the world is going to look very different in not many years. America turning in on itself and away from world trade is an opportunity China is not going to miss.
Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports though, China has an excess for industry production and cheap goods exported abroad so we will see what Trump's tariffs do
Poland is on a trajectory to overtake France as the foremost military power on the continent.
"When things settle down, Poland will be the regional superpower in Europe and will be able to dominate the local military space, far in excess of UK. " - viewcode, 2023/01/29
Poland is on a trajectory to overtake France as the foremost military power on the continent.
"When things settle down, Poland will be the regional superpower in Europe and will be able to dominate the local military space, far in excess of UK. " - viewcode, 2023/01/29
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
If there's anyone writing (accurate) history books
I hear on the news that the EU is going to free up $800bn to rearm. SKS is talking about "boots on the ground."
Seems overkill to oppose Russia which is set to collapse any minute now according to PB war-watchers.
I don't think there are many on here or elsewhere that think Russia is about to collapse, though definition of what that may mean is likely to vary. Very few people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, so it is possible, even if unlikely.
I myself, through having a personal connection with Ukraine, pray for the day when Putin dies or is overthrown, though what replaces him is almost as frightening. What is essential IMO, is that Russia must not be allowed to think that they have won. Their once assumed to be mighty military has been almost thoroughly humiliated by a much smaller one.
They will no doubt try to learn from this and rearm. We need to form a new alliance of democratic powers and release the US from what is clearly too big a burden for them, the grown-up burden of leadership. They can be reinvited to such a club if they return to being a beacon of hope and freedom such as they used to be. I also pray for that day.
*Raises hand* - I'm tentatively predicting the collapse of Russia, within 20 years or so. But there's a lot can happen between now and then. Very broadly, we are much better off if we are in a position to contain and shape the Russian collapse than if we are not. And importantly, the fewer people Russia is able to kill and the less of the world economy it is able to control between now and then, the better.
Russia is currently, clearly, a major threat to Ukraine, and if it is able to conclude its war in Ukraine favourably, it will be a major threat to our allies in Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia. This strikes me as a bad outcome and I do not understand the view of those who are indifferent to it.
However, while there are good and bad outcomes for what remains of the west, there are no good outcomes for Russia. If it loses, it has lost millions of people and most of its cash reserves for nothing and its people are likely to be a bit cross. If it wins, it has expanded its empire, but a significant share of its population will be sullen and resentful. History suggests this is more likely to be an expensive burden for it than a benefit.
FWIW, my prediction is that ... after this lot ... we are likely to have a new cold war with an iron curtain along wherever the final ceasefire / armistice line turns out to be.
I have no idea when Russia will collapse ... last time it took 30-45 years, depending how the start is dated.
One (not very likely, but more charitable than the obvious) theory about Mr Trump's actions is that he is concerned about the consequences of a complete Russian collapse in terms of China getting fuller Pacific access and a big chunk of Russia than he is about the consequences of collapsing Ukraine and handing it over to be dismembered.
From a USA Govt realpolitikal view, there is some logic to it.
Yes, I've thought along those lines. If and when Russia does collapse, who picks up the pieces? One way of making sure it's not China is by doing what Putin is now. Possibly in 25 years time, the superpowers of the day (USA? China? Europe? None of them are by any means certain to still be powers in 25 years time) will be picking over the corpse of Russia like squabbling eagles over a dead elk.
Quite frankly, Britain is more likely to collapse than Russia
I hope your likelihoods don't inform your betting.
Given that Britain came within a large whisker of collapsing in 2014 - via Scottosh indy (which will return, one day) - then it's not like I am predicting something outlandish
Go listen to that David Betz podcast I linked yesterday
Ah that guy. You might also want to read his article about how Hungary is great and why Britain should not support the‘ stupid’ Ukraine war. He’s so balanced.
Yes, here's his opinion of the Ukraine war. Be a good centrist dad, and point out the bit that is insane -
"Now focusing on the Russo–Ukrainian conflict, it started a little more than two years ago. Was there any part of it in which it looked like it wasn’t going to be a stupid war?"
Betz: "No. It is paradigmatically stupid: unnecessary and unwinnable.
Moreover, it seems now obvious that the decision on the part of the West to pursue the war in the way that it has done was on the basis of a series of very flawed, even hubristic, assumptions, the primary one being that Russia was nowhere as economically strong and militarily capable as it has turned out to be."
"Can we label this war as ‘stupid’ even from a Ukrainian perspective?"
Betz: "From the Ukrainian perspective, it is a different story. But speaking from a Western perspective, with respect to the Western involvement in the Russo-Ukraine war, using Ukraine as its proxy, as essentially a meat puppet, it is a stupid war. Ukraine has been used very cynically, been ‘led up the garden path’ to use an English cliché. That’s what I’m what I’m talking about. I do think the Ukrainians are in a horrible position of having very limited, very limited choices. But they’ve been encouraged to do the stupid thing.
"They’ve been encouraged to effectively take actions which will probably result in the collapse of their country and the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. It’s a country that has had something about a third to half of its population displaced abroad. Who knows if they will move back and of course, many, many thousands of their soldiers have been killed. I’m speaking primarily from the point of view of Western involvement. When it comes down to it, Ukrainians have been very badly used by the West, which will ultimately abandon them. "
What is “stupid”, in terms of pure, cold-blooded, realpolitik, about bleeding Russia of men, money, and armoured vehicles? It’s what people like Kissinger, Talleyrand, Palmerston etc. would have done.
This is a case where the expedient course of action is also the morally correct course of action.
The dishonesty in the piece is to imply that Ukraine has been pushed into war by the West, against its own interests. When, in reality, Ukraine has no choice but to fight. Regardless whether the West supports them or not, they have no option in the matter.
I'd also add that he is wrong that the west has underestimated Russian economic and military strength. The reverse is true.
The was in Ukraine is one of those occasions where doing the morally right thing coincides with doing the strategically advantageous thing.
This is palpable bollocks. I know PB is not “the entire west” but it’s quite a good sample of mainstream educated western/British opinion
From month 3 of the war it was an endless stream of “Russia is collapsing”, “look at their stupid tanks”, “Putin is dying”, “any minute now the Russian economy will implode”
None of this has happened. And when some of us, like me and @topping and @Dura_Ace and @Luckyguy1983 dared to point out that Ukraine was in trouble we got called fucking appeasers and putinist shills for our pains
There has been a lot of over-optomistic prediction of Russian collapse over the years here on PB, it has to be said.
However, when the invasion started, I think the consensus was that if Ukraine could last two weeks it would have done better than expected. Certainly no-one expected Ukraine to launch a counter invasion.
We haven't heard much about the Kerch Bridge lately. Have the Russians managed to ensure it's security?
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
There are already draconian sanctions and banking sanctions in Russia, for quite some time, with little or no effect on forcing them to negotiate peace. Unless Trump has recently lifted them without telling anyone, this is just bollocks.
It's just a random social media post to make sure he stays as the top story on the rolling news. Probably something had knocked him off for ten minutes and that he cannot have. And, lo, it works. It's getting reported as some big and meaningful development. Same with his "hell to pay" nonsense to Hamas yesterday. What can you do. He's like an untreatable virus.
Poland is on a trajectory to overtake France as the foremost military power on the continent.
"When things settle down, Poland will be the regional superpower in Europe and will be able to dominate the local military space, far in excess of UK. " - viewcode, 2023/01/29
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
South Africa is being terrible, plus, to long time Farmers in the country. They are confiscating their LAND and FARMS, and MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. A bad place to be right now, and we are stopping all Federal Funding. To go a step further, any Farmer (with family!) from South Africa, seeking to flee that country for reasons of safety, will be invited into the United States of America with a rapid pathway to Citizenship. This process will begin immediately!
I can see Trump bombing South Africa if he can get all the white people out first.
He's kicking out Ukrainian refugees to make way for South Africans?
The Ukrainian Russian conflict is whites v whites mainly while whites are the minority in South Africa for white nationalist Trump
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
I was thinking about what someone said yesterday, about greater Brtish dislike of Trump than some European nations being linked to hearing him in one's own language.
Slavoj Zizek had something similar to say about his views on Putin. He says he's heard, symoathised with, and rehearsed various arguments from fellow leftists about the West not being lilywhite in the origins of the conflict, and then he turns on Russian state tv, which he can understand quite a lot of. All the hatred and authoritarian contempt pours out from every orifice, and he remembers what side he's on. My own view isn't too far from this.
I was told by (anti-Trump) Americans on my team that the Canadians “burned down the White House in 1814”, which made me ponder how much of national memory is actually quite ahistorical.
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I'll be honest, I think having nukes and a prominent geopolitical position (Both geographically and politically re US bases, trident and so on) makes us more vulnerable than we otherwise would be if the shit hits the fan. To take your own roots, noone is going to nuke New Zealand if WW3 breaks out.
I was told by (anti-Trump) Americans on my team that the Canadians “burned down the White House in 1814”, which made me ponder how much of national memory is actually quite ahistorical.
Be careful - you'll set TSE and MD at each other's throats again.
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I'll be honest, I think having nukes and a prominent geopolitical position (Both geographically and politically re US bases, trident and so on) makes us more vulnerable than we otherwise would be if the shit hits the fan. To take your own roots, noone is going to nuke New Zealand if WW3 breaks out.
But not because New Zealand “has no nukes”.
In any case, you may well be wrong. Soviet plans actually revealed there WERE plans to nuke New Zealand.
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
If there's anyone writing (accurate) history books
More likely the history books will asking how did the agendaist left seize control of the institutions of the west with no-one noticing. Why was Trump the person who noticed when thousands who saw themselves as more able than him just let it pass. Unlike Starmer, Biden wasn't an obvious Rubicon that should not have been passed. The change in the UK will be more understated but in many ways more vicious against those who have stolen the state from the people.
DOT Secretary Sean Duffy has sent a letter to Mayor Bowser saying all "murals or other forms of artwork within the traveled way" should be removed in the interest of roadway safety. FWIW studies indicate roadway art reduces crashes. https://x.com/rachelweinerwp/status/1897784391008497809
So Trump blames Ukraine for not wanting peace, blames them for the war, punishes them by cutting of weapons and intelligence and his proxies trying to force out its president, and he is now acting surprised Russia has been taking advantage?
Because his bestie, Putin, told Trump he was a pacifist and only wanted everyone to join hands and sing lullabies.
Ah, is that what they were doing in that Moscow hotel bedroom?
DOT Secretary Sean Duffy has sent a letter to Mayor Bowser saying all "murals or other forms of artwork within the traveled way" should be removed in the interest of roadway safety. FWIW studies indicate roadway art reduces crashes. https://x.com/rachelweinerwp/status/1897784391008497809
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
South Africa is being terrible, plus, to long time Farmers in the country. They are confiscating their LAND and FARMS, and MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. A bad place to be right now, and we are stopping all Federal Funding. To go a step further, any Farmer (with family!) from South Africa, seeking to flee that country for reasons of safety, will be invited into the United States of America with a rapid pathway to Citizenship. This process will begin immediately!
I can see President Musk bombing South Africa if he can get all the white people out first.
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
If there's anyone writing (accurate) history books
More likely the history books will asking how did the agendaist left seize control of the institutions of the west with no-one noticing. Why was Trump the person who noticed when thousands who saw themselves as more able than him just let it pass. Unlike Starmer, Biden wasn't an obvious Rubicon that should not have been passed. The change in the UK will be more understated but in many ways more vicious against those who have stolen the state from the people.
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I am not sure I am that concerned about Britain being less powerful in those terms. If I look around at the countries I admire, the Scandinavian states and Switzerland for example I think they are powerful and influential in their own ways without strutting about on the world stage.
I have no issue with is having nukes and I think the seat on the Security Council is very useful, not least because it protects up from vexatious diplomatic attacks, but I would not consider it can national disaster if we were just considered as one more fortunate first world country.
Poland is on a trajectory to overtake France as the foremost military power on the continent.
"When things settle down, Poland will be the regional superpower in Europe and will be able to dominate the local military space, far in excess of UK. " - viewcode, 2023/01/29
Trump: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.”
South Africa is being terrible, plus, to long time Farmers in the country. They are confiscating their LAND and FARMS, and MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. A bad place to be right now, and we are stopping all Federal Funding. To go a step further, any Farmer (with family!) from South Africa, seeking to flee that country for reasons of safety, will be invited into the United States of America with a rapid pathway to Citizenship. This process will begin immediately!
I can see Trump bombing South Africa if he can get all the white people out first.
He's kicking out Ukrainian refugees to make way for South Africans?
The Ukrainian Russian conflict is whites v whites mainly
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
There haven't been elections in almost 20 years in Gaza, so I'm not sure where your "democratically elected" line comes from.
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I am not sure I am that concerned about Britain being less powerful in those terms. If I look around at the countries I admire, the Scandinavian states and Switzerland for example I think they are powerful and influential in their own ways without strutting about on the world stage.
I have no issue with is having nukes and I think the seat on the Security Council is very useful, not least because it protects up from vexatious diplomatic attacks, but I would not consider it can national disaster if we were just considered as one more fortunate first world country.
Those countries you admire have sheltered under a NATO defence umbrella.
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
If there's anyone writing (accurate) history books
More likely the history books will asking how did the agendaist left seize control of the institutions of the west with no-one noticing. Why was Trump the person who noticed when thousands who saw themselves as more able than him just let it pass. Unlike Starmer, Biden wasn't an obvious Rubicon that should not have been passed. The change in the UK will be more understated but in many ways more vicious against those who have stolen the state from the people.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
There haven't been elections in almost 20 years in Gaza, so I'm not sure where your "democratically elected" line comes from.
Was exactly my point. Jeez.
My apologies, but you didn't use the irony or sarcasm tags, so I thought you were being serious.
Thought for the day: what do the Tories and Reform have in common?
In both cases their most effective politician is not the leader. Jenrick for the Tories and Lowe for Reform. Both of them probably see eye-to-eye on quite a lot. Could they team up, and if so, under which banner?
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
If there's anyone writing (accurate) history books
More likely the history books will asking how did the agendaist left seize control of the institutions of the west with no-one noticing. Why was Trump the person who noticed when thousands who saw themselves as more able than him just let it pass. Unlike Starmer, Biden wasn't an obvious Rubicon that should not have been passed. The change in the UK will be more understated but in many ways more vicious against those who have stolen the state from the people.
I think you might need your AI equipment recalibrated. That made no sense whatsoever.
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social · 16m Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
Well yes, the current Trump administration makes nuclear proliferation inevitable.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
When the history books are written in 50 years time - the greatest question that people won't get is how on earth did someone as inconsistent and unsuitable as Trump become President twice...
If there's anyone writing (accurate) history books
I've had a bit of stick on PB for pointing out how this movement is an evolution of what has been there before in the self-perception of USA people and their religious, cultural and political history.
The first book I read about Christianity in America was an historical survey from the Pilgrim Fathers onwards, in the mid-1980s, edited by an author called Mark Noll.
In 1983 (new edition 1989) he with 2 others wrote a different book called "The Search for Christian America (TSFCA)", which had a focus on the Christian-right movements which tried to use Reagan to further their agenda (example: Jerry Falwell & The Moral Majority). And put it in the sweep of the USA's religious history.
This piece is a chapter by chapter content outline and review of the book, published in 2024, in the light of the Trump movement.
The reviewer draws a contrast between the Christian Authoritarianism (as embraced by those around Trump), and Christian toleration - the latter being his own view. Both streams have been in the USA since the start. You could frame it as "exclusive" and "inclusive", with icons of JD Vance and Bishop Budde.
DOT Secretary Sean Duffy has sent a letter to Mayor Bowser saying all "murals or other forms of artwork within the traveled way" should be removed in the interest of roadway safety. FWIW studies indicate roadway art reduces crashes. https://x.com/rachelweinerwp/status/1897784391008497809
Jenrickism goes global.
This is more random incompetent malignity than the targeted type.
Thought for the day: what do the Tories and Reform have in common?
In both cases their most effective politician is not the leader. Jenrick for the Tories and Lowe for Reform. Both of them probably see eye-to-eye on quite a lot. Could they team up, and if so, under which banner?
You're writing off Nigel Farage? This feels like a moment.
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I'll be honest, I think having nukes and a prominent geopolitical position (Both geographically and politically re US bases, trident and so on) makes us more vulnerable than we otherwise would be if the shit hits the fan. To take your own roots, noone is going to nuke New Zealand if WW3 breaks out.
During the Cold War, the New Zealanders believed that their anti-nuclear stance protected them.
After the Cold War, it was revealed that the Soviet Union thought it was a lie and a trick. So just to be sure, they planned on nuking New Zealand, in a general nuclear exchange. The fallout levels would have been lethal across the islands for weeks, in addition to the complete destruction of all the population centres. Given the remoteness, and the probable complete collapse in trade, 100% extinction of human life in New Zealand was guaranteed.
The Palestinians believe that Israel is an occupying power ("from the river to the sea" is pretty unambiguous in terms of desired end state) and its very existence reason for the continued struggle, while Israel seems for the moment to be going nowhere.
It's certainly hard to see one right now. But things can change. Perhaps one day in America there will come to power a hard-nosed deal-making President who will use their leverage over Israel and its Arab neighbours in a forceful yet balanced way to force a two state solution.
I don't think many Palestinians, certainly the democratically-elected government of Gaza, wants a two-state solution.
There haven't been elections in almost 20 years in Gaza, so I'm not sure where your "democratically elected" line comes from.
Was exactly my point. Jeez.
My apologies, but you didn't use the irony or sarcasm tags, so I thought you were being serious.
It is an interesting sub-thread - what do you do with a dictatorial government which has arrogated to itself the right to go to war on behalf of a people.
DOT Secretary Sean Duffy has sent a letter to Mayor Bowser saying all "murals or other forms of artwork within the traveled way" should be removed in the interest of roadway safety. FWIW studies indicate roadway art reduces crashes. https://x.com/rachelweinerwp/status/1897784391008497809
Jenrickism goes global.
The destruction of art you say. The Trump administration becomes more like ISIS everyday.
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I'll be honest, I think having nukes and a prominent geopolitical position (Both geographically and politically re US bases, trident and so on) makes us more vulnerable than we otherwise would be if the shit hits the fan. To take your own roots, noone is going to nuke New Zealand if WW3 breaks out.
But not because New Zealand “has no nukes”.
In any case, you may well be wrong. Soviet plans actually revealed there WERE plans to nuke New Zealand.
Surely the guns will be on London and Paris before Auckland if push and shove come now though ?
One of the side effects of nuclear proliferation is that it makes the UK, France and the other confirmed nuclear powers relatively less powerful.
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
I'll be honest, I think having nukes and a prominent geopolitical position (Both geographically and politically re US bases, trident and so on) makes us more vulnerable than we otherwise would be if the shit hits the fan. To take your own roots, noone is going to nuke New Zealand if WW3 breaks out.
But not because New Zealand “has no nukes”.
In any case, you may well be wrong. Soviet plans actually revealed there WERE plans to nuke New Zealand.
Surely the guns will be on London and Paris before Auckland if push and shove come now though ?
Comments
1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration. ⬇️
https://x.com/chriso_wiki/status/1898019984623665325?s=46
Over a lot of the front, Russia has advanced merely a few miles in the last 18 months and when they hit a place that Ukraine defend, like Chasiv Yar, they have taken a bit over half of a town slightly bigger than Lyme Regis in a year.
The advance on Pokrovsk and flanking towns is the significant exception, but even here the advance is on the scale of Stockport across country to the edge of Crewe to partially cut off free Chester, and the battle for Crewe, Sandbach and Alsager themselves is yet to commence.
Ukraine have to watch themselves in Kursk with Russia advancing in Sumy oblast to try and encircle.
But overall, unless the intelligence and weaponry changes change the balance of losses from Russian meat grinder tactics significantly, the continued attrition of slow advance (aka death let's remember) puts pressure on Russia.
New: Ukrainians’ trust in Volodymyr Zelensky has risen significantly over the past month after the Ukrainian president was publicly berated by his US counterpart Donald Trump and Washington paused military aid to Kyiv.
In a poll of 1,000 Ukrainians conducted last month by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), 57% of Ukrainians said they trust Zelensky, while 37% said they did not.
But in a new poll, conducted by KIIS from February 14 to March 4, 67% of Ukrainians said they trust Zelensky – a 10% boost – while just 29% said they do not.
Israel seems to have adopted a "fuck it" strategy in its conflicts with the Arab world. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb approach. They did in 1947-8 when the Arab world went to war with them, they (Israel) began winning, so thought let's grab some land, and they have done ever since.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution
Who the hell knows now ?
So that only really leaves one come 2027.
In geopolitics in the Americas, his heroes are from a period when the USA was obsessing about getting Canada, did buy Alaska then had a fight with Canada about the border, tried to buy Greenland, and started (McKinley) the Panama Canal.
I don't know why he would be focused on those, but he is to McKinley as some of us are to Churchill or Lloyd George. Perhaps it came down the family, or he mollified himself with history in childhood.
Since he never reads anything, has replaced all the experts who would save him from himself with mushrooms, and takes no interest in briefings, guess where he gets his dreams from?
But he's of the view (supported by data on the numbers of "concerns" reported to Prevent) that the "Nativists" as he calls them are a bigger threat than the Islamists, who he thinks have culminated.
The noisy rhetoric we tend to hear is nativists blaming *all* the Muslims.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_INZM98BAyk
Unless Trump has recently lifted them without telling anyone, this is just bollocks.
A soldier gets deployed to a place and complained that he had to wake up at 4 am every day, do two hours of drill, struggle through a swamp and get eaten alive by mosquitoes, get shot at and then go on watch for twelve hours.
An airman gets deployed to a place and complained that there was no air-conditioning.
8/ Specifically, three issues have been raised:
"He wanted to eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
https://x.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1898020000029413818
They had the opposite effect.
Shashank Joshi @shashj.bsky.social
·
16m
Crikey. This is moving quicker than I expected. 'Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear and modern unconventional weapons.'
https://bsky.app/profile/shashj.bsky.social/post/3ljscagogzs2y
Not a happy prospect for the world.
And with more (and more unstable) countries getting the bomb, it's only a matter of time before someone detonates one of the things.
In regard to the carriers, how many minutes until they are at the bottom of the ocean in an actual hot war?
I'm a little interested in why Saudi and Israel (who were seeking to normalise relations until the Gaza conflict got in the way) are reportedly involved in "reduce intelligence to the USA" conversations and if it is with the non-compromised Five Eyes members.
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/01/29/the-intermarium/
The UK’s boast that it is is a “nuclear power” and “permanent member of the Security Council” is made hollow.
Trump is a disaster.
Slavoj Zizek had something similar to say about his views on Putin. He says he's heard, symoathised with, and rehearsed various arguments from fellow leftists about the West not being lilywhite in the origins of the conflict, and then he turns on Russian state tv, which he can understand quite a lot of. All the hatred and authoritarian contempt pours out from every orifice, and he remembers what side he's on. My own view isn't too far from this.
In any case, you may well be wrong.
Soviet plans actually revealed there WERE plans to nuke New Zealand.
Otherwise, why ??
DOT Secretary Sean Duffy has sent a letter to Mayor Bowser saying all "murals or other forms of artwork within the traveled way" should be removed in the interest of roadway safety. FWIW studies indicate roadway art reduces crashes.
https://x.com/rachelweinerwp/status/1897784391008497809
I have no issue with is having nukes and I think the seat on the Security Council is very useful, not least because it protects up from vexatious diplomatic attacks, but I would not consider it can national disaster if we were just considered as one more fortunate first world country.
A lot of shops that have been empty since the pando are suddenly open and even bustling
Nice
In both cases their most effective politician is not the leader. Jenrick for the Tories and Lowe for Reform. Both of them probably see eye-to-eye on quite a lot. Could they team up, and if so, under which banner?
The first book I read about Christianity in America was an historical survey from the Pilgrim Fathers onwards, in the mid-1980s, edited by an author called Mark Noll.
In 1983 (new edition 1989) he with 2 others wrote a different book called "The Search for Christian America (TSFCA)", which had a focus on the Christian-right movements which tried to use Reagan to further their agenda (example: Jerry Falwell & The Moral Majority). And put it in the sweep of the USA's religious history.
This piece is a chapter by chapter content outline and review of the book, published in 2024, in the light of the Trump movement.
The reviewer draws a contrast between the Christian Authoritarianism (as embraced by those around Trump), and Christian toleration - the latter being his own view. Both streams have been in the USA since the start. You could frame it as "exclusive" and "inclusive", with icons of JD Vance and Bishop Budde.
I found it informative.
https://heidelblog.net/2024/04/review-the-search-for-christian-america-by-mark-a-noll-nathan-o-hatch-and-george-m-marsden/
After the Cold War, it was revealed that the Soviet Union thought it was a lie and a trick. So just to be sure, they planned on nuking New Zealand, in a general nuclear exchange. The fallout levels would have been lethal across the islands for weeks, in addition to the complete destruction of all the population centres. Given the remoteness, and the probable complete collapse in trade, 100% extinction of human life in New Zealand was guaranteed.
China is basically trying to produce the entire semiconductor supply chain domestically, which I don't think any country has tried to do before.
Here are some key segments within the chip industry and examples of Chinese players..
https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1898042192809054703
My Sekrit plan to attack New Zealand uncovered!