Shame there werent any other articles about it anywhere else on the whole internet.
2 Likes
He has most definitely said it was his last term, people just love to ignore that and focus on something else he has said that suits their interpretation of what he will do, and I guess the same could be said about me. I am 100% sure history will show that this is his last term no matter how many times people try to convince otherwise.
I looked at several, next time ill send you a pm first, alternatively you can just believe I am being disingenuous, It doesnât bother me.
The Orange Tornado has promised so so much, with very little hope of achieving it⌠This will undoubtedly lead him to saying at some point down the road⌠he needs another term to fullfil his promises -
You are not disingenuous, you are just incurious and content to participate in discussions without listening or reading (to understand - reading to confirm a bias is a different activity). The expectation of someone asking a question to help them understand something is for them to not have already formed a strong opinion about the issue that would make them preemptively reject certain answers.
This is a constant thread of the way you engage in these debates
Strong opinion - > retreat to acknowledgements you dont know enough when corrected â some time later return back to the exact same strong opinion you have previously had corrected and anyone who doesnt agree with you is biased.
âJFK isnt an anti vaxer. That is just LW propaganda from people who dont want to debate his opinionsâŚ[presented with overwhelming evdiece of his long history of being anti vax]âŚoh, well Im busy and I dont have time to read up about him.â
4 Likes
Step 1 - refuse to acknowledge he has said (repeatedly) the things he has said
Step 2 - yet again refuse to grapple with the issue of how bad it is to float this shit even if he sometimes says the opposite and has no intention of doing it and it doesnt come to pass.
As Arminius said, the tweet in question is literally quoting him floating the idea of congress helping him find a way to get another term. Even if you had never heard him say it before, itâs literally right there in the post you are responding to.
1 Like
How about this: give Ukraine what it needs to kick Putinâs ass, because, oh I dunno, it is the right thing to do?
Appeasement will just allow Putin to regroup and rearm, before going again. Whatâs next? Poland?
Putin is in charge of the relationship with the United States, and he is about to get what he wants in Ukraine. What America is communicating to the world is that there will be no help, no backing, no decency, and international law will be meaningless. So since might is right, everyone needs to think about how to get themselves some nukes as soon as possible.
Ukraine gave up their nuclear arsenal when the Soviet Union was dismantled. 1994. 1700 nuclear weapons. In exchange for security guarantees from the international community.
What lesson has been taught to a watching world in allowing Ukraine to be smashed?
3 Likes
That when Putin gets what he wants then subsequently goes after one of the Baltic former Soviet states that the US will do nothing in response and NATO will be dead.
6 Likes
Also, no one wants Ukraine to force a Russian surrender. What one wants is to aid Ukraine so that Russia is forced to change itâs calculus and withdraw itâs invading army so there can be peace. But Trump canât do that without sbstantially increasing aid, he can only force Ukrainian conditional capitulation; which is hardly peace and will hardly lead to anything but future war.
1 Like
Exactly. And if you want to give a bully pause for thought, you need a big stick. Get some nukes asap. Russia might still beat you in a war, if they want to go all out, but in the exchange you can wipe out their capital or other cities, and give them enough damage to last over 100 years that they would really rather leave you alone.
Getting nukes asap if you are a democracy, is not easy though. It is not easy for an autocracy either (but far easier).
1 Like
Nukes are of use only mainly for deterrence. Little else.
There canât be any justification given to use Nukes preemptively. Not only is the country risking their population , itâs just not done. And no country with nukes is going to say Iâll rather leave you alone after the other country has launched a nuclear attack against them. Theyâll just turn the first country into a nuclear wasteland. Kill millions in the process and then say , yeah. Iâd rather leave you alone
The use of nukes as a preemptive tool is a zero sum game.
Those nukes were stored in Ukraine but they belonged to the Soviets. Ukraine didnât have the capability to access them. Codes etc.
That was a different time before Putinâs rise to power.
Nukes? We do all know that one nuke between anybody and Russia will start a chain of events which will pretty much sterilise the planet of life donât we? Russiaâs Tsar Bomber was more powerful that every single piece of ordinance (including Japan) used in WW2. The planet could kill everything that breathes 10 times over.
1 Like
Nukes are of use only mainly for deterrence. Little else.
[/quote]
Quite. And if Ukraine had them, Putin would not have invaded.
The international community did not defend Ukraine as it promised when she gave up her nukes. The lesson is⌠get your own deterrent then.
I understand they belonged to the USSR, which broke up.
Thatâs a heck of a lot of raw materials in the hands of Ukraine, even if Russia had the access codes to actually work them.
In an age of non-proliferation Ukraine did a great thing. Less nukes in the world is obviously a good thing. Ideally no nuclear weapons.
But the international community did not protect Ukraine, as weâve seen, so I would imagine they feel utterly betrayed.
Itâs a very harsh and extreme lesson, but if the international community wonât protect you even after they said they would, who will? We may be entering an age where it is every man for himself, and the world is a massively more dangerous place for it.
1 Like
This is of course a lesson, but I donât see a point discussing nukes much now. It is too late now anyway to build and use as a deterrant in the current industrial war.
In case you want details, I have an expert thread for you.
https://x.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1856965582857671061
Not that itâs on topic, but this thread is about to die anyway.
1 Like
Getting this in about the election before this closesâŚthis thread tells a more nuanced story than âdems stayed homeâ to explain what happened in the election
https://x.com/AJentleson/status/1857219633268334885
Remember, the EC system creates some weird patterns. There is evidence in the national vote of Dems staying at home, but that appears to be concentrated in âsafe statesâ where it didnt matter (it always matters). In the battleground states though Harris actually turned out her base, increasing the raw totals from Biden in NV, NC, WI, and GA. The issue is across the battleground states Biden voters switched over to vote for Trump.
1 Like
As earlier it was a protest vote against the current political system.
Well theyâve got the change they asked for now even though I suspect the outcome of that will not be what they wanted
1 Like
