Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Yes, he can gum up NATO while in office, but a next President can undo those things just as quickly.
And the one after can redo it - and that there is no consensus anymore on NATO membership among the US population is why it cannot last as it is.
It's not like if, say, the Netherlands were to pull out. Unwanted, sure, but the US is a whole different beast if its membership is a partisan question, which it is (GOP might have said they were not against traditionally, but they clearly are now, and the voters would follow).
Support for NATO remains reasonably high in polling, I believe. There’s a bunch of Americans who will support anything Trump says, but they’re not necessarily wedded to his individual whims. Once he’s gone, many of his bugbears will be off the table.
That’s not to say, of course, that the MAGA crowd won’t be radicalised by reading Elon Musk’s X to believe some other nonsense.
It surprises me there is not a mechanism for a certain number of members to demand the House return. I don't know if we have something like that, we might not, but given the convoluted process of who has the power to do what I'd expect it in the USA rather than, if reporting is an indication, the Speaker can just do what they like.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Yes, he can gum up NATO while in office, but a next President can undo those things just as quickly.
And the one after can redo it - and that there is no consensus anymore on NATO membership among the US population is why it cannot last as it is.
It's not like if, say, the Netherlands were to pull out. Unwanted, sure, but the US is a whole different beast if its membership is a partisan question, which it is (GOP might have said they were not against traditionally, but they clearly are now, and the voters would follow).
Support for NATO remains reasonably high in polling, I believe. There’s a bunch of Americans who will support anything Trump says, but they’re not necessarily wedded to his individual whims. Once he’s gone, many of his bugbears will be off the table.
That’s not to say, of course, that the MAGA crowd won’t be radicalised by reading Elon Musk’s X to believe some other nonsense.
I suppose my position comes down to not believing things will return to 'normal' once Trump goes. I think it remains Trumpian for a long time, even if the next candidate is not, say, Don Jr.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
All of their nearest and most dangerous adversaries are severely weakened
Their reputation isn’t looking so good; but so many hated them anyway that fucking up the Iranians was probably worth the further reputational damage
Really? I think the chances of Israel not existing in a decade have gone from almost nothing to quite meaningful. Which is incredibly sad.
Who's going to wipe them out? If there's no regime change in Iran then the emnity between Iran and the Gulf states won't go away, so Isreal will have more allies in the region than it did before.
PRESS SEC: It’s quite sad that NATO turned their backs on the American people over the last six weeks when it’s the American people who have been funding their defense.
President Trump looks forward to having a very frank and candid conversation with Secretary Rutte.
Let’s be honest - NATO is dead. So why entertain Trump and his ridiculous delusions
Indeed. Now, some may say that it is overdramatic to just accept NATO is dead, and fair enough, but what is the case is that trying to mollify Trump does not work, so when he says he is considering withdrawal there's literally no point in begging him not to because it is not good for us or the USA.
NATO isn’t dead if the next US President is less mad/incompetent/venal than Trump. Also. Trump can’t withdraw the US from NATO. That decision is up to Congress and there aren’t the votes for withdrawal.
As I've noted the threat is damaging in its own right, and he certainly can take action to seriously disrupt NATO even if he cannot withdraw. Dead is not literal, but it will be far less than it was.
And I have to disagree that the next US President being less mad etc than Trump makes much difference. 40% of the USA is on board with whatever Trump proposes (no matter if a current poll were to say fewer than that were against this policy), and that means US support for NATO hinges on a few hundred thousands voters in swing states every 4 years.
The alliance cannot build for the future on such a base.
Trump's habit would perhaps be deliberately to stay to wreck it.
They may do what they did to the WTO.
Reminds me of another country that used to be in a certain multi-national organization...
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Same, on the grounds that the Greens are less likely to deport me than Reform.
(Deport me where though, that's a trickier question as I am as British as Queen Victoria.)
As Queen Victoria? So to where will they report you?
Germany or the Isle of Wight?
I can speak fluent German, what language do they speak on the Isle of Wight?
Don’t raise the profile of the Isle of Wight too much or Starmer will try to give it to France.
Other than @IanB2 and @Foxy would we really miss it?
@IanB2 would get his maroon passport back which has to be a bonus.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
This is sub-Judice so none of you are allowed to comment. Cough.
Unless you can come up with something non-prejudicial.
(So where was bloody Hegseth when he was needed to be baptised?)
A pastor has been charged with gross negligence manslaughter after a man died during a baptism ceremony in Birmingham.
Robert Smith, 61, from Brixton, London, died from drowning at an address on Slade Road, Erdington, on 8 October 2023.
Cheryl Bartley, 48, was charged with one count of gross negligence manslaughter in relation to her role as a pastor during the baptism, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.
Bartley, of Erdington, will appear at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 14 May.
The BBC previously reported that the man was taking part in the ceremony carried out by Life Changing Ministries in a small pool in the property's garden.
The baptism event was streamed live on the church's Facebook page, but the stream was cut during the event and the video later removed.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Don't forget the bigger breasts.
Despite the fact his method has many knockers?
He was a bit of a boob.
I need to keep abreast of these comments.
These puns are getting to the stage where they are braly appropriate.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Same, on the grounds that the Greens are less likely to deport me than Reform.
(Deport me where though, that's a trickier question as I am as British as Queen Victoria.)
As Queen Victoria? So to where will they report you?
Germany or the Isle of Wight?
I can speak fluent German, what language do they speak on the Isle of Wight?
Don’t raise the profile of the Isle of Wight too much or Starmer will try to give it to France.
Other than @IanB2 and @Foxy would we really miss it?
@IanB2 would get his maroon passport back which has to be a bonus.
I haven't done the steam railway yet!
I did the Brecon Mountain Railway yesterday, thinking of steam railways. Quite impressive scenery and the locomotive was a lovingly restored Baldwin 4-6-2T with a fair number of horses under the boiler. Blowing off steam at the top was a sight to behold.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Don't forget the bigger breasts.
Despite the fact his method has many knockers?
He was a bit of a boob.
I need to keep abreast of these comments.
These puns are getting to the stage where they are braly appropriate.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Same, on the grounds that the Greens are less likely to deport me than Reform.
(Deport me where though, that's a trickier question as I am as British as Queen Victoria.)
As Queen Victoria? So to where will they report you?
Germany or the Isle of Wight?
I can speak fluent German, what language do they speak on the Isle of Wight?
Don’t raise the profile of the Isle of Wight too much or Starmer will try to give it to France.
Other than @IanB2 and @Foxy would we really miss it?
@IanB2 would get his maroon passport back which has to be a bonus.
I haven't done the steam railway yet!
You had better be quick, before Smallbrook Junction is renamed the Gare de l’Est.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Of course. But for most purposes, the US commitment to collective security is already suspended while Trump remains president.
The remaining relationship, if Trump de facto 'withdraws' would be completely transactional - and the US still needs use of several European bases.
A step down to the barest minimum of cooperation might not be any further destabilising that the existing situation. It would if anything reduce Trump's influence and ability to destabilise.
We then wait to see if his successor wants to try to restore relations.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Of course. But for most purposes, the US commitment to collective security is already suspended while Trump remains president.
The remaining relationship, if Trump de facto 'withdraws' would be completely transactional - and the US still needs use of several European bases.
A step down to the barest minimum of cooperation might not be any further destabilising that the existing situation. It would if anything reduce Trump's influence and ability to destabilise.
We then wait to see if his successor wants to try to restore relations.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Of course. But for most purposes, the US commitment to collective security is already suspended while Trump remains president.
The remaining relationship, if Trump de facto 'withdraws' would be completely transactional - and the US still needs use of several European bases.
A step down to the barest minimum of cooperation might not be any further destabilising that the existing situation. It would if anything reduce Trump's influence and ability to destabilise.
We then wait to see if his successor wants to try to restore relations.
Not if it is Vance, that's for sure.
It doesn't much matter who it is. Other States are unlikely to trust the US again for generations. Why should they, when their security depends on the US not electing another madman?
All of their nearest and most dangerous adversaries are severely weakened
Their reputation isn’t looking so good; but so many hated them anyway that fucking up the Iranians was probably worth the further reputational damage
Really? I think the chances of Israel not existing in a decade have gone from almost nothing to quite meaningful. Which is incredibly sad.
Who's going to wipe them out? If there's no regime change in Iran then the emnity between Iran and the Gulf states won't go away, so Isreal will have more allies in the region than it did before.
The potential (very negative for Israel) gamechanger would be the US withdrawing its political and military support. That's becoming less unlikely than it has ever been imo. Post Trump America, ie where it goes after and as a consequence of Trump, is no easier to predict than what the fag end of his time in power is going to bring.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Yes, he can gum up NATO while in office, but a next President can undo those things just as quickly.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Of course. But for most purposes, the US commitment to collective security is already suspended while Trump remains president.
The remaining relationship, if Trump de facto 'withdraws' would be completely transactional - and the US still needs use of several European bases.
A step down to the barest minimum of cooperation might not be any further destabilising that the existing situation. It would if anything reduce Trump's influence and ability to destabilise.
We then wait to see if his successor wants to try to restore relations.
Not if it is Vance, that's for sure.
It doesn't much matter who it is. Other States are unlikely to trust the US again for generations. Why should they, when their security depends on the US not electing another madman?
We know how this goes. A new US leader comes to power, says a few moderately nice things to Europeans, and suddenly it’s all forgiven. The grudge won’t last long, and the memories will fade. So the next Trump will come as a shock, again.
Or that new US leader will never come to power because the US democracy ends.
JD Vance: "Will you stand against the bureaucrats in Brussels? Will you stand for western civilization? Will you stand for freedom, truth, and the God of our fathers? Then, my friends, go to the polls and stand for Viktor Orban!" https://x.com/atrupar/status/2041549460199686359
It's not normal for VPs to give election rally speeches in another country, is it ?
Can you imagine if say the UK Deputy PM went to the USA and stood on stage campaigning for the Dem against a GOP President. There would be absolute furore over there . Yet they go round interfering in others elections.
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
JD Vance: "Will you stand against the bureaucrats in Brussels? Will you stand for western civilization? Will you stand for freedom, truth, and the God of our fathers? Then, my friends, go to the polls and stand for Viktor Orban!" https://x.com/atrupar/status/2041549460199686359
It's not normal for VPs to give election rally speeches in another country, is it ?
Can you imagine if say the UK Deputy PM went to the USA and stood on stage campaigning for the Dem against a GOP President. There would be absolute furore over there . Yet they go round interfering in others elections.
This author has chosen to make their posts visible only to people who are signed in.
I think it's about this.
"America," Hegseth's underlings told the cardinal, "has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Church had better take its side."
I have just had a letter from the DVLA stating that my driving license has been revoked - after 40 years.
Events were. 1 - Received a letter saying they had left some information off it and I needed to return the license. 2 - I did so - a few days late, as I was not here for the 3 weeks they allowed for reply. I returned it. Of course I have proof of posting. 3 - They wrote to me 10 days later with "your license has been revoked".
(Obviously it is a 3 year medical license.)
Has anyone dealt with something like this? How do I deal with it?
Do I need to jump straight to a solicitor? I know tales of the DVLA.
Did their medical panel look at your circumstances recently? AFAIK it's medical information to appeal once you know the (medical) reason for the revocation. I came close to having mine taken away (vertigo) but my doctor steered me through the questionnaire. The form was amusingly titled DIZ1
I did a new medical application for a new license last autumn, and received a licence.
It is not a medical reason for revocation - that's the whole problem, it's a paperwork fuck-up. I received my new licence and they asked for it back because they had not put some information on it.
Top quote:
"We have not received a response to the letter we sent you on XYZ asking you to return the driving license which was issued to you with incorrect or incomplete details.
As you have not done so, your driving license will be revoked (cancelled) from ABC and you should not drive. Please return your driving license in the enclosed envelope provided."
I did return my licence in the envelope provided - fully 10 days before they issued this letter.
I suspect letters have crossed in the post and you just need to call them
JD Vance: "Will you stand against the bureaucrats in Brussels? Will you stand for western civilization? Will you stand for freedom, truth, and the God of our fathers? Then, my friends, go to the polls and stand for Viktor Orban!" https://x.com/atrupar/status/2041549460199686359
It's not normal for VPs to give election rally speeches in another country, is it ?
Can you imagine if say the UK Deputy PM went to the USA and stood on stage campaigning for the Dem against a GOP President. There would be absolute furore over there . Yet they go round interfering in others elections.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Yes, he can gum up NATO while in office, but a next President can undo those things just as quickly.
Much longer to rebuild trust.
It's going to take a long time, if ever, for me to come to terms with the fact that the Americans elected this moron. I would like to be confident that they would never, ever be so stupid again.
NEW: A stunning new report claims that the Pentagon summoned Pope Leo XIV’s top American diplomat and threatened him after the U.S.-born pontiff gave his January state-of-the-world address.
Leo used the address to denounce a world ruled by “a diplomacy based on force” and “zeal for war.”
UPDATE: Letters from Leo can now independently confirm that the meeting took place — and that the Vatican was so alarmed by the Pentagon’s tactics that Pope Leo XIV shelved plans to visit the United States later this year.
Many in the Vatican saw the Pentagon’s reference to an Avignon papacy as a threat to use military force against the Holy See.
Polanski has had a humour bypass . He also needs to get his teeth sorted out .
As for the Greens policies . Idealistic fantasy drivel.
I'll put you down as a 'maybe'.
If it was a choice only between the Greens and Reform I’d have to vote for Polanski. I’m willing to accept a diet of mung beans and daily gatherings around a camp fire singing kumbaya !
Same, on the grounds that the Greens are less likely to deport me than Reform.
(Deport me where though, that's a trickier question as I am as British as Queen Victoria.)
As Queen Victoria? So to where will they report you?
Germany or the Isle of Wight?
I can speak fluent German, what language do they speak on the Isle of Wight?
Don’t raise the profile of the Isle of Wight too much or Starmer will try to give it to France.
I think we're safe - we could give them the island, but where would we find the money for the £38bn bung?
I eagerly await the LuckyGuy & WilliamGlenn Netflix special. It will be an absolute hoot.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Of course. But for most purposes, the US commitment to collective security is already suspended while Trump remains president.
The remaining relationship, if Trump de facto 'withdraws' would be completely transactional - and the US still needs use of several European bases.
A step down to the barest minimum of cooperation might not be any further destabilising that the existing situation. It would if anything reduce Trump's influence and ability to destabilise.
We then wait to see if his successor wants to try to restore relations.
Not if it is Vance, that's for sure.
It doesn't much matter who it is. Other States are unlikely to trust the US again for generations. Why should they, when their security depends on the US not electing another madman?
We know how this goes. A new US leader comes to power, says a few moderately nice things to Europeans, and suddenly it’s all forgiven. The grudge won’t last long, and the memories will fade. So the next Trump will come as a shock, again.
Or that new US leader will never come to power because the US democracy ends.
Doesn't even take a new leader. Trump and Vance go on about how much they hate Europe, then they have Rubio give a much gentler speech and we pretend to believe the other two are just being a little rude, not that they mean what they say.
JD Vance: "Will you stand against the bureaucrats in Brussels? Will you stand for western civilization? Will you stand for freedom, truth, and the God of our fathers? Then, my friends, go to the polls and stand for Viktor Orban!" https://x.com/atrupar/status/2041549460199686359
It's not normal for VPs to give election rally speeches in another country, is it ?
Can you imagine if say the UK Deputy PM went to the USA and stood on stage campaigning for the Dem against a GOP President. There would be absolute furore over there . Yet they go round interfering in others elections.
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
It’s an absolute fuckin shambles
The Pakistani mediators who brokered the deal said it was included, but the US can't prevent Israel from fucking it up
Without wishing to blow my own trumpet, this is what I posted two years ago when Raisi was killed in that helicopter crash and other posters were suggesting an attack on Iran:
Add this moment, with their proxies at war with Israel and their backers at war with Ukraine and claiming NATO involvement, it really wouldn't be a good idea.
The Israelis might do it, because Netanyahu is a complete loon, but NATO is hopefully a little more cautious.
All of their nearest and most dangerous adversaries are severely weakened
Their reputation isn’t looking so good; but so many hated them anyway that fucking up the Iranians was probably worth the further reputational damage
Netanyahu not Israel. There's the usual disconnect between the interests of a strongman leader and that of the country (and population) he leads.
I disagree - it's definitely in Israel's interest to knock out much of Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranian leadershi0, whoever is in charge.
Laying waste to Gaza and Lebanon, suckering the US into a war with Iran that threatens the global economy, aggressively colonising the West Bank. These things might look like victory in the short term but if the objective is a secure and peaceful longer term future for Israel they don't imo advance that one iota.
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
This is sub-Judice so none of you are allowed to comment. Cough.
Unless you can come up with something non-prejudicial.
(So where was bloody Hegseth when he was needed to be baptised?)
A pastor has been charged with gross negligence manslaughter after a man died during a baptism ceremony in Birmingham.
Robert Smith, 61, from Brixton, London, died from drowning at an address on Slade Road, Erdington, on 8 October 2023.
Cheryl Bartley, 48, was charged with one count of gross negligence manslaughter in relation to her role as a pastor during the baptism, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.
Bartley, of Erdington, will appear at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 14 May.
The BBC previously reported that the man was taking part in the ceremony carried out by Life Changing Ministries in a small pool in the property's garden.
The baptism event was streamed live on the church's Facebook page, but the stream was cut during the event and the video later removed.
Is this meant to be a cautionary tale, or simply an illustration of social darwinism in action?
Interesting. Full immersion baptism is usually very quick. Is a cold pool in October enough to cause a heart attack? And would that be gross negligence? Or did something more sustained happen? I doubt they would prosecute this without serious evidence. One to watch.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 1h !!! Trump to discuss possibility of withdrawing from NATO in meeting in a couple of hours with NATO's secretary general, White House says
He doesn't need to formally withdraw from NATO to make it effectively defunct, or less dramatically just screw up its internal workings and long term plans.
Much like how he couldn't and cannot shut down USAID, but he was able to cancel all its contracts and fire its staff.
I think this is where some people can be distracted by knowing too much, if that makes any sense - since he cannot actually withdraw without Congress, the threat is treated as bluster by experts, when less knowledgable me would say the mere threat is destabilising and damaging.
Yes, he can gum up NATO while in office, but a next President can undo those things just as quickly.
Much longer to rebuild trust.
It's going to take a long time, if ever, for me to come to terms with the fact that the Americans elected this moron. I would like to be confident that they would never, ever be so stupid again.
Twice. For me it's the 2nd time that beggars belief. All the evidence was there that he was utterly unfit yet they did it. I've heard all the trad punditry about the inflation, the woke, the deficiencies of the opponent, yada yada, but that just doesn't wash. There was something deeper, something rotten, something gone very wrong with the country, for such a simultaneously dark and ludicrous episode to have happened, not by force but by choice. Even when it's over - and please make it soon - it'll be hard to just say 'aberration', tempting though that will be.
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
And? Exactly what incentive does a country get from hosting US military bases except Poland and a couple of other countries bordering Russia.
Reality is (as I've pointed out before) if we lost some US bases we would have ready made sites for a new town...
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Whatevs.
The loss of a Spanish naval base would be particularly self defeating for the US.
The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that he believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war -WSJ
This is sub-Judice so none of you are allowed to comment. Cough.
Unless you can come up with something non-prejudicial.
(So where was bloody Hegseth when he was needed to be baptised?)
A pastor has been charged with gross negligence manslaughter after a man died during a baptism ceremony in Birmingham.
Robert Smith, 61, from Brixton, London, died from drowning at an address on Slade Road, Erdington, on 8 October 2023.
Cheryl Bartley, 48, was charged with one count of gross negligence manslaughter in relation to her role as a pastor during the baptism, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.
Bartley, of Erdington, will appear at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 14 May.
The BBC previously reported that the man was taking part in the ceremony carried out by Life Changing Ministries in a small pool in the property's garden.
The baptism event was streamed live on the church's Facebook page, but the stream was cut during the event and the video later removed.
Is this meant to be a cautionary tale, or simply an illustration of social darwinism in action?
Interesting. Full immersion baptism is usually very quick. Is a cold pool in October enough to cause a heart attack? And would that be gross negligence? Or did something more sustained happen? I doubt they would prosecute this without serious evidence. One to watch.
A cold water plunge could trigger the mammalian diving reflex, which might in turn set off latent heart rhythm irregularities?
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
And? Exactly what incentive does a country get from hosting US military bases except Poland and a couple of other countries bordering Russia.
Reality is (as I've pointed out before) if we lost some US bases we would have ready made sites for a new town...
I guess local economies benefit from a big US base. Brings some money in.
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Israel isn't in NATO, so why should NATO members help it?
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Whatevs.
The loss of a Spanish naval base would be particularly self defeating for the US.
The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that he believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war -WSJ
A US withdrawal from Germany, in the context of European arms buildup, wouldn't be that big of a deal either.
And it will further hit the appeal of buying US weapons, with all the potential issues and interference that comes with them.
Once again we have the situation where the whims of one old, sick and demented man determine an entire country's approach to diplomacy and security and military and supposedly they are the world's greatest democracy.
Without wishing to blow my own trumpet, this is what I posted two years ago when Raisi was killed in that helicopter crash and other posters were suggesting an attack on Iran:
Add this moment, with their proxies at war with Israel and their backers at war with Ukraine and claiming NATO involvement, it really wouldn't be a good idea.
The Israelis might do it, because Netanyahu is a complete loon, but NATO is hopefully a little more cautious.
And then the US went and elected fecking Trump...
I was concerned when Netanyahu became PM again, and really worried when it became clear that Trump would run again. I'm not going to claim I knew what would happen, but I thought it would certainly be trouble. We and other countries should have been preparing for this sort of recklessness, but far too many people in authority seem to take the view that "it can't happen" or "it won't happen on my watch".
The scenario that has worried me the most is what would Trump do if another 9/11 happened? My hunch is that he'd be nuking somewhere before the day is over.
Mar 3: "We won the war." Mar 7: "We defeated Iran." Mar 9: "We must attack Iran." Mar 9: "The war is ending almost completely, and very beautifully. March 10: practically nothing left to target Mar 11: “You never like to say too early you won. We won. In the first hour it was over.” Mar 12: "We did win, but we haven't won completely yet." Mar 13: "We won the war." Mar 14: "Please help us." Mar 15: "If you don't help us, I will certainly remember it." Mar 16: "Actually, we don't need any help at all." Mar 16: "I was just testing to see who's listening to me." Mar 16: "If NATO doesn't help, they will suffer something very bad." Mar 17: "We neither need nor want NATO's help." Mar 17: "I don't need Congressional approval to withdraw from NATO." Mar 18: "Our allies must cooperate in reopening the Strait of Hormuz." Mar 19: "US allies need to get a grip - step up and help open the Strait of Hormuz." Mar 20: "NATO are cowards." Mar 21: "The Strait of Hormuz must be protected by the countries that use it. We don't use it, we don't need to open it." Mar 22: "This is the last time. I will give Iran 48 hours. Open the strait" Mar 22: "Iran is Dead"
Mar 23: "We had very good and productive talks with Iran." Mar 24: "We’re making progress." Mar 25: “They gave us a present and the present arrived today. And it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.” Mar 26: "Make a deal, or we’ll just keep blowing them away." Mar 27: "We don’t have to be there for NATO." Mar 28: No major quote Mar 29: Claimed talks were progressing Mar 30: "Open the Strait of Hormuz immediately, or face devastating consequences." Mar 31: Claimed a deal was "very close" and that Iran would "do the right thing" Apr 1: "We’ll see what happens very soon." Apr 2: Repeated that a deal was likely, while warning of continued strikes if not Apr 3: "Something big is going to happen." Apr 4: Said Iran must comply "immediately" or face further consequences.
Apr 5: "Open the fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah." April 6 :a whole civilization will die April 7: total and complete victory April8: objectives were met
Mar 3: "We won the war." Mar 7: "We defeated Iran." Mar 9: "We must attack Iran." Mar 9: "The war is ending almost completely, and very beautifully. March 10: practically nothing left to target Mar 11: “You never like to say too early you won. We won. In the first hour it was over.” Mar 12: "We did win, but we haven't won completely yet." Mar 13: "We won the war." Mar 14: "Please help us." Mar 15: "If you don't help us, I will certainly remember it." Mar 16: "Actually, we don't need any help at all." Mar 16: "I was just testing to see who's listening to me." Mar 16: "If NATO doesn't help, they will suffer something very bad." Mar 17: "We neither need nor want NATO's help." Mar 17: "I don't need Congressional approval to withdraw from NATO." Mar 18: "Our allies must cooperate in reopening the Strait of Hormuz." Mar 19: "US allies need to get a grip - step up and help open the Strait of Hormuz." Mar 20: "NATO are cowards." Mar 21: "The Strait of Hormuz must be protected by the countries that use it. We don't use it, we don't need to open it." Mar 22: "This is the last time. I will give Iran 48 hours. Open the strait" Mar 22: "Iran is Dead"
Mar 23: "We had very good and productive talks with Iran." Mar 24: "We’re making progress." Mar 25: “They gave us a present and the present arrived today. And it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.” Mar 26: "Make a deal, or we’ll just keep blowing them away." Mar 27: "We don’t have to be there for NATO." Mar 28: No major quote Mar 29: Claimed talks were progressing Mar 30: "Open the Strait of Hormuz immediately, or face devastating consequences." Mar 31: Claimed a deal was "very close" and that Iran would "do the right thing" Apr 1: "We’ll see what happens very soon." Apr 2: Repeated that a deal was likely, while warning of continued strikes if not Apr 3: "Something big is going to happen." Apr 4: Said Iran must comply "immediately" or face further consequences.
Apr 5: "Open the fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah." April 6 :a whole civilization will die April 7: total and complete victory April8: objectives were met
A true disaster
Trump military triumph my arse as Jim Royale would say.
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
And? Exactly what incentive does a country get from hosting US military bases except Poland and a couple of other countries bordering Russia.
Reality is (as I've pointed out before) if we lost some US bases we would have ready made sites for a new town...
I guess local economies benefit from a big US base. Brings some money in.
Probably less than repurposing the buildings for British civilian use.
Trouble is that Spain and Germany are ahead of the UK on the naughty list.
Quick Prime Minister- say something really disobliging about the USA- good therapy for you, good grubby electoral politics and even good for the country.
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Which ones are being punished by that? Not clear if it’s better to have them or not!
"The ministry said the decision [to dramatically reduce US presence] was expected and that the "resizing" of US forces was a result of the new priorities of the Trump presidential administration."
"I have priorities but if you don't like 'em I have others"
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Which ones are being punished by that? Not clear if it’s better to have them or not!
You just sense that this US administration really can’t read the room. They’re in their own social media bubble and they don’t understand what the big world out there thinks of them.
NATO exists, in essence, to protect Europe from Russia / the USSR. Now that the US has shown it has no intention of protecting anyone from Russia, what purpose does its presence serve, except to interfere in domestic elections?
Without wishing to blow my own trumpet, this is what I posted two years ago when Raisi was killed in that helicopter crash and other posters were suggesting an attack on Iran:
Add this moment, with their proxies at war with Israel and their backers at war with Ukraine and claiming NATO involvement, it really wouldn't be a good idea.
The Israelis might do it, because Netanyahu is a complete loon, but NATO is hopefully a little more cautious.
And then the US went and elected fecking Trump...
I was concerned when Netanyahu became PM again, and really worried when it became clear that Trump would run again. I'm not going to claim I knew what would happen, but I thought it would certainly be trouble. We and other countries should have been preparing for this sort of recklessness, but far too many people in authority seem to take the view that "it can't happen" or "it won't happen on my watch".
The scenario that has worried me the most is what would Trump do if another 9/11 happened? My hunch is that he'd be nuking somewhere before the day is over.
Yes I worry about that too. Specifics can't be predicted but what you can say with certainty is the general operative level of 'global catastrophe' risk is elevated by the fact of Donald Trump as US president and it will stay that way until he's gone.
For someone who acts like a big cry baby victim when people tackle your opinions, you sure like to bully others
Have a good evening.
He has a point tbh. I don't think said "others" particularly care and I don't think you're aware you're doing it or this is your intention, but it would be worth doing a bit of introspection about it.
Either that or make the personal attacks funny and/or unhinged.
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Israel isn't in NATO, so why should NATO members help it?
For the same reason we help Ukraine, it is the right thing to do.
For clarity, the agreed ceasefire statement last night from Sharif, Pakistan's PM, started with:
With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
'Including Lebanon' seems pretty unambiguous to me.
For clarity, the agreed ceasefire statement last night from Sharif, Pakistan's PM, started with:
With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
'Including Lebanon' seems pretty unambiguous to me.
The US once interpreted the words 'imminent threat' to not necessarily mean there was a specific threat, nor that it was imminent, but ignoring 'including Lebanon' may be too creative even for them.
I am absolutely fascinated to see how the next few years pan out. Let's start by assuming we muddle through without armageddon or economic armageddon. I reckon even if Trump wants a third term, he's not medically up to it - indeed I have grave doubts he gets through this term. I don't think Vance or any Trumpspawn have the electoral appeal to continue the project. Bluntly, I think without Trump, MAGA fizzles out. I don't think - touch wood - it is competent or powerful enough to overturn democracy, except at the margins. I don't think GOP comes back lightly from this. Dems win easily in 2028, no matter how crazy they are. What happens then?
My view is - tragic as this might seem - the rest of the west just pretends none of this ever happened. We go back to 2012.
I don't buy the 'never trust America again' argument. We in Europe are few enough of friends as it is, and don't even trust each other much. There's China and India, but while I buy the argument that the leaders of those countries are at least tethered to reality, there's no obvious reason why future American madman is any worse than future Chinese or Indian madman. I still, of course, hanker after @Gardenwalker's vision of an Anglo-Canadian future - potentially bolstered by serious alliances with Australia and the Scandinavians and an understanding with the French - but is that enough to stand against a rest-of-the-world that now includes America? I don't think it does. So we persist with American 'friendship' for want of anything else. Fascinated to hear the alternatives.
Iran might have lost a lot of their military assets but have now realized they don’t need much to cause global turmoil.
Anytime they feel like it they can just shut the Strait of Hormuz .
Although we’ve seen in the past threats to shut that but it’s really when they played their last card or last roll of the roulette wheel that they struck gold .
As it turned out shutting the Strait was a lot easier than they could have imagined .
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Israel isn't in NATO, so why should NATO members help it?
For the same reason we help Ukraine, it is the right thing to do.
Comments
That’s not to say, of course, that the MAGA crowd won’t be radicalised by reading Elon Musk’s X to believe some other nonsense.
Is this meant to be a cautionary tale, or simply an illustration of social darwinism in action?
https://x.com/AlertesInfos/status/2041951785837908356
But for most purposes, the US commitment to collective security is already suspended while Trump remains president.
The remaining relationship, if Trump de facto 'withdraws' would be completely transactional - and the US still needs use of several European bases.
A step down to the barest minimum of cooperation might not be any further destabilising that the existing situation. It would if anything reduce Trump's influence and ability to destabilise.
We then wait to see if his successor wants to try to restore relations.
Before the soldiers came
The life was cheap on bread and wine
And sharing meant no shame
She is awakened by the screams
Of rockets flying from nearby
And scared, she clings onto her dreams
To beat the fear that she might die
And who will have won
When the soldiers have gone
From the Lebanon?
The Lebanon
Before he leaves the camp, he stops
He scans the world outside
And where there used to be some shops
Is where the snipers sometimes hide
He left his home the week before
He thought he'd be like the police
But now he finds he is at war
Weren't we supposed to keep the peace?
And who will have won
When the soldiers have gone
From the Lebanon?
The Lebanon
The Lebanon
From the Lebanon
I must be dreaming
It can't be true
I must be dreaming
It can't be true
And who will have won
When the soldiers have gone
From the Lebanon?
The Lebanon
The Lebanon
From the Lebanon
Or that new US leader will never come to power because the US democracy ends.
JOHN BOORMAN’s legendary LEE MARVIN story contains one of my favourite punchlines of all time.
https://x.com/For_Film_Fans/status/2041930358988443675
https://x.com/rapidresponse47/status/2041965489312719330
.@VP: "The Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case."
You can't trust a man in eyeliner!
"America," Hegseth's underlings told the cardinal, "has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Church had better take its side."
As tempers rose, one US official reached for a 14th century weapon and invoked the Avignon Papacy ...
https://x.com/dcpoll/status/2041947545706836430
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1848
NEW: A stunning new report claims that the Pentagon summoned Pope Leo XIV’s top American diplomat and threatened him after the U.S.-born pontiff gave his January state-of-the-world address.
Leo used the address to denounce a world ruled by “a diplomacy based on force” and “zeal for war.”
UPDATE: Letters from Leo can now independently confirm that the meeting took place — and that the Vatican was so alarmed by the Pentagon’s tactics that Pope Leo XIV shelved plans to visit the United States later this year.
Many in the Vatican saw the Pentagon’s reference to an Avignon papacy as a threat to use military force against the Holy See.
https://x.com/ChristopherHale/status/2041959904823366074?s=20
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4785251/#Comment_4785251
Add this moment, with their proxies at war with Israel and their backers at war with Ukraine and claiming NATO involvement, it really wouldn't be a good idea.
The Israelis might do it, because Netanyahu is a complete loon, but NATO is hopefully a little more cautious.
And then the US went and elected fecking Trump...
He can't be considered complete as he's gutless, brainless and heartless.
Gary Baldy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLojVzP1byk
SCOOP: The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that it believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war, according to administration officials.
The proposal would involve moving U.S. troops out of NATO countries deemed unhelpful to the Iran war effort and station them in countries that were more supportive of the U.S. military campaign
Reality is (as I've pointed out before) if we lost some US bases we would have ready made sites for a new town...
The loss of a Spanish naval base would be particularly self defeating for the US.
The Trump administration is considering a plan to punish some members of the NATO alliance that he believes were unhelpful to the U.S. and Israel during the Iran war -WSJ
Along with repositioning troops, the plan could involve closing a U.S. base in Spain or Germany.
https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/2041972446157299817
A US withdrawal from Germany, in the context of European arms buildup, wouldn't be that big of a deal either.
And it will further hit the appeal of buying US weapons, with all the potential issues and interference that comes with them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diving_reflex
Not a peep from GOP in Congress.
Reagan would be on fire.
The scenario that has worried me the most is what would Trump do if another 9/11 happened? My hunch is that he'd be nuking somewhere before the day is over.
Actual quotes from President Trump:
Trump’s “victory timeline” claims.
Mar 3: "We won the war."
Mar 7: "We defeated Iran."
Mar 9: "We must attack Iran."
Mar 9: "The war is ending almost completely, and very beautifully.
March 10: practically nothing left to target
Mar 11: “You never like to say too early you won. We won. In the first hour it was over.” Mar 12: "We did win, but we haven't won completely yet."
Mar 13: "We won the war."
Mar 14: "Please help us."
Mar 15: "If you don't help us, I will certainly remember it."
Mar 16: "Actually, we don't need any help at all."
Mar 16: "I was just testing to see who's listening to me."
Mar 16: "If NATO doesn't help, they will suffer something very bad."
Mar 17: "We neither need nor want NATO's help."
Mar 17: "I don't need Congressional approval to withdraw from NATO."
Mar 18: "Our allies must cooperate in reopening the Strait of Hormuz."
Mar 19: "US allies need to get a grip - step up and help open the Strait of Hormuz."
Mar 20: "NATO are cowards."
Mar 21: "The Strait of Hormuz must be protected by the countries that use it. We don't use it, we don't need to open it."
Mar 22: "This is the last time. I will give Iran 48 hours. Open the strait"
Mar 22: "Iran is Dead"
Mar 23: "We had very good and productive talks with Iran."
Mar 24: "We’re making progress."
Mar 25: “They gave us a present and the present arrived today. And it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.” Mar 26: "Make a deal, or we’ll just keep blowing them away."
Mar 27: "We don’t have to be there for NATO."
Mar 28: No major quote
Mar 29: Claimed talks were progressing
Mar 30: "Open the Strait of Hormuz immediately, or face devastating consequences."
Mar 31: Claimed a deal was "very close" and that Iran would "do the right thing"
Apr 1: "We’ll see what happens very soon."
Apr 2: Repeated that a deal was likely, while warning of continued strikes if not
Apr 3: "Something big is going to happen."
Apr 4: Said Iran must comply "immediately" or face further consequences.
Apr 5: "Open the fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah."
April 6 :a whole civilization will die
April 7: total and complete victory
April8: objectives were met
A true disaster
(In Canada.)
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/conservative-mp-marilyn-gladu-crosses-150114956.html
Trump military triumph my arse as Jim Royale would say.
Trouble is that Spain and Germany are ahead of the UK on the naughty list.
Quick Prime Minister- say something really disobliging about the USA- good therapy for you, good grubby electoral politics and even good for the country.
Romania is one apparently.
Am I on drugs or did the Trump administration pull back from Romania and close down a well stacked US base in erm Romania only about three months ago?
Whims of one man. Demented and old. 25th now.
"The ministry said the decision [to dramatically reduce US presence] was expected and that the "resizing" of US forces was a result of the new priorities of the Trump presidential administration."
"I have priorities but if you don't like 'em I have others"
NATO exists, in essence, to protect Europe from Russia / the USSR. Now that the US has shown it has no intention of protecting anyone from Russia, what purpose does its presence serve, except to interfere in domestic elections?
OSINTtechnical
@Osinttechnical
·
1h
Iran’s Hormuz toll plan involves only allowing roughly a dozen ships per day through the Strait,
Pakistan conveyed its "strongest ever anger" to Iran after they struck a Saudi petrochemical facility - Reuters
Hubris is a cruel mistress.
Either that or make the personal attacks funny and/or unhinged.
Be Harry or Draco, not Vincent Crabbe.
With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
'Including Lebanon' seems pretty unambiguous to me.
Let's start by assuming we muddle through without armageddon or economic armageddon.
I reckon even if Trump wants a third term, he's not medically up to it - indeed I have grave doubts he gets through this term.
I don't think Vance or any Trumpspawn have the electoral appeal to continue the project. Bluntly, I think without Trump, MAGA fizzles out. I don't think - touch wood - it is competent or powerful enough to overturn democracy, except at the margins.
I don't think GOP comes back lightly from this. Dems win easily in 2028, no matter how crazy they are.
What happens then?
My view is - tragic as this might seem - the rest of the west just pretends none of this ever happened. We go back to 2012.
I don't buy the 'never trust America again' argument. We in Europe are few enough of friends as it is, and don't even trust each other much. There's China and India, but while I buy the argument that the leaders of those countries are at least tethered to reality, there's no obvious reason why future American madman is any worse than future Chinese or Indian madman.
I still, of course, hanker after @Gardenwalker's vision of an Anglo-Canadian future - potentially bolstered by serious alliances with Australia and the Scandinavians and an understanding with the French - but is that enough to stand against a rest-of-the-world that now includes America? I don't think it does. So we persist with American 'friendship' for want of anything else.
Fascinated to hear the alternatives.
Anytime they feel like it they can just shut the Strait of Hormuz .
Although we’ve seen in the past threats to shut that but it’s really when they played their last card or last roll of the roulette wheel that they struck gold .
As it turned out shutting the Strait was a lot easier than they could have imagined .