Politics

[Tanks]

russian army isnt as bad as people think

You are basing that statement on their Ukraine accomplishments?

 

[Scott CWO]

Why the heck should Trump give a darn about you and your oil-rich isolationist government?

I couldn't figure you out but then I remembered this short video,

Oh.... Trump makes me sad...

One of my favorite name-calling names - Jackwagon! Describes a lot of idiots these days.

 

[Scott CWO]

Gotta disagree with you here. Most of the world and its major corporations are working on ways to run their businesses without the U.S. as a reliable partner, and literally building infrastructure to avoid being so dependent on the United States. Canada, as I suspect you know, will likely conclude a free trade deal with India this year. Also, Canada's second largest trading partner is no longer China (as of last year) it is now the U.K. For another example BMW is pouring money into refurbishing their X3 plant in South Africa so they can sell those vehicles to markets (including Canada and Mexico) previously serviced by South Carolina, because with the trade wars the U.S. is engaging in it is the best way to make a profit. If you go to your BMW dealership today and order a new X3, their biggest selling model in Canada, it will come to you from South Africa now, not the United States. Other companies are doing exactly the same thing.

Despite the U.S. tariffs China exported more goods than ever last year.

The idea of getting on Trump's good side is an illusion. He is mercurial and short tempered. Nobody trusts him to stand by his word and stick with a long term deal. No business or country is willing to tie their prosperity to a guy who sets policy based on his blood sugar surges. Why make a deal with a guy you don't think will abide by it?

Secondarily, he acts like a bully. And nobody wants to give an olive branch to a bully. It just invites more aggression.

BMW? No big loss. A bit off subject but a couple of my neighbors have had nothing but problems with their BMWs and notoriously expensive to fix.

 

[farmer_john]

You are basing that statement on their Ukraine accomplishments?

Lol i miss typed.
But they havent really accomolished much bro.

 

[mdwest]

I don't know who got to Joe Kent, but He probably should have reviewed his posts with respect to Iran over the last few years before pulling a Tucker Carlson. I don't think he will even get his fifteen minutes. There are many other similar posts.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2034076369383219482

My guess is his wife…

She works for Max Blumenthal at The Grey Zone… extreme far left, anti Zionist, etc etc…

 

[Scott CWO]

I'm going about 90% of the way with you on this whole post. Very well reasoned indeed.

But there is a but, and it's a big but (as opposed to a big butt).

The but is that we used to be able to do those long term plans within certain parameters, understanding that our counterparts in the United States would act within certain bounds. There was plenty of variability at play, but Trump tossed all of those bounds out the window. Fair enough, he's entitled to (until SCOTUS tells him otherwise because congress currently in lap dog mode).

And you are right Trump only has 2.5 years left. But there is no guarantee that the next President will be less of an asshole. Trump has proven that his formula works in American electoral politics and others might actually believe in Trumpism or they just might want to emulate it to get elected.

Unfortunately the world's future planning now has to include the possibility that the next one might just be another Trump. We might be pleasantly surprised, we might get another Reagan or even a Bush, but if we plan on another co-operative partner and we get another Trump then we will have made a critical error. Our forward planning has to include the very real risk that these trends might run much longer than the current administration. Doesn't it? Canada's and other countries turning away from the United States, if they can, is not just to deal with Trump, it provides insurance against a future Trump.

Have you listened to Rubio, Vance and even Desantis? All much more articulate than Trump. There’s only one Donald Trump and in some ways, that’s good and bad.

 

[CoElkHunter]

BMW? No big loss. A bit off subject but a couple of my neighbors have had nothing but problems with their BMWs and notoriously expensive to fix.

And made by elves in the Bavarian forests?

 

[CoElkHunter]

The Chinese Navy will not be allowed in the strait or the Persian Gulf.

Neither will the Zambian or Zimbabwe Navies.

 

[458JCE]

My 2 cents on this war:
At last we have a war where the politicians/supreme leaders who perpetrate the war are getting taken out directly! Without the loss of a generation of young men/boys.

 

[1dirthawker]

Pardon me..but is this the way to honour 6 dead service men..wearing a cap like this..?

haters are gonna hate

 

[1dirthawker]

some might say the worse, worse than the French, not to be confused with French Fries, French Fries are great"

funny stuff!

 

[KJE81]

Regarding allied help in the Strait of Hormuz. If NATO looses Lindsey Graham they loose their biggest cheerleader in the Senate.

Most of NATO supports a non NATO country in Ukraine but doesn’t support a NATO country in the gulf. Trump is putting the countries on record.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2033924181763481974

Is not NATO a defensive alliance? If the US were attacked and invoked article 5 just like after 9/11 I sure hope all allies would heed the call. But in this case the US is the aggressor and therefore it does not seem to be any case for it to be considered a NATO issue.

Perhaps it would have been wiser to build a coalition like before Desert Storm or the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The israeli probably could still have taken out the Ayatollah before coalition forces started their part of the warfare.

I mean instead of trying to blackmail other countries to join the war with threats of a bad future for Nato etc...now he actually just makes it seem like the administration has realized that the US Navy cant handle Iran alone which makes them look a little desperate.

 

[Vashper]

PS:

France, Germany, UK, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands all symbolically sent troops to Greenland over Trump rhetoric that was never going to happen. Those same countries won’t even go to the gulf to escort their own flagged carriers through the straits.

Is it over ideology or does Europe not even have the capacity to protect their owns ships. Either way it doesn’t seem to bode well for the current NATO relationships.

Yes, but NATO exists to fight the Russian threat. They are at war with Russia, and they believe that this is enough. And to ship tankers through Hormuz, it is enough for them to negotiate with the IRGC, like China and India - it is much cheaper.

 

[mark-hunter]

I'm sorry, but Belgium was "run over" TWICE in WW1 and WW2 by Germany. When will Belgium and other European countries stand up for themselves and pay the price to have strong militaries for defense of their countries instead of spending their treasures on welfare for many of their useless non working citizens and immigrants (same in the US) and relying on others for their defense. IMO, making a "deal" with Putin is like making a deal with the Devil.

Hehe, yes, you have a point. But it is not entirely Europes fault.

Lets remember the old adage of Nato, from US perspective: "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down".

So, Germany is "down" demilitarized, kept down during cold war, for few decades, with limited military and industrial capacity. Legacy of Pax Americana.
In my view, reductions in their military budgets have been diverted to economic growth and civil industry development. They profited nicely from that

They need to build up now.
But they are late.
Also, they had no other option, as per above.

Moreover.
If you want strong Europe, the reality is modern defense rests on space capabilities, is then built down from it.

Sattelites: Recconosance, targeting, positioning, communication.
USA is developing these capabilities since end of WW2, and have invested trillions. But it took decades to build and develop. (similar stands for Russians, and Chinese)

Next step below space race, is stealth air force, Awacs planes, fighters and strategic stealth bombers - again, capabilities developed by USA for decades and with trillions invested. Not to mention emerging new technologies: hypersonic. (USA, Russia, China by now)

Imagine Germany or any other nation, again, starting all this from scratch? Entire EU to invest time, development and invest treasure to achieve this?
Yes it is possible, but not in 5 minutes.

So this is a bridge too far, for time being, and it will take decades. .

What modern EU defense narrative is:
they will build - tanks. Leopards.
Some artillery.
Shells.
Ammunitions.
Improved missiles.

Essentilay, WW2 improved designs, in modern space age. Without space capabilties, they will always need supporting "sponsor"

So, in order to build their defenses properly with full capabilities, they have long way to go.

Sociologically, there is another problem. We in EU, we are all busy with public narrative of DEI policies, stupid non productive green energy, LGBT rights, political correctness, immigrants rights, etc...

O yes, we also have multicultural societies, multiethnic societies, immigrant minorities (and immigrant Majorities) and we in EU have: conscientious objection (the civil right to decline serving the army and carry weapons). this is engraved in legislative and in constitutions

It means nobody wants to join the army. Nothing attractive there. A legacy of decades living in peace under USA protection
So, once they build thousands of tanks, hundreds of aircraft, build the navy vessels and subs, there will be a problem who will drive all of this? It will require a cultural turnover.

Finally, EU approved 800 billion defense start up plans, and industry build up. FIne. That's something.
But it is based on obsolete designs.
But it will give some economic kick.
And, as per latest - US president Trump is saying this is not good, EU should not build and purchase their weapons, they should buy American.

In the meantime under all these sanctions against russia, EU is facing problem of cheap energy. Industry and development is not built on 200 USD dollar per barrel.

And on Belgium, so many times being overrun by foreign countries:

They keep EU finances (compare to Switzerland banking business, and Swiss for their neutrality and financial system have not been overrun. last few hundred years)
And Belgium is EU.
So is under EU defense umbrella.

All in all, everything is complicated, and long term solution, is not within easy reach. Not to mention different interests of various EU countries.

I do hope, next cycle of election will bring new set of leaders with courage and vision to change things.

Mediocres in power till now just deepened this mess.

 

[spike.t]

He

Neither will the Zambian or Zimbabwe Navies.

Hey come on.....I seen a couple of 30ft or so aluminium boats with couple outboards on....could be there very quickly....can be sent in a plane ...rapid deployment

 

[Pondoro]

Zambia rapid force..?

 

[MS 9x56]

It has been a few years sense I studied maritime law for my seamanship corses but wouldn’t and attack on a tanker by Iran be construed as an act of war against whatever country the vessel was flagged under?

I believe you are correct.

 

[VertigoBE]

I'm sorry, but Belgium was "run over" TWICE in WW1 and WW2 by Germany. When will Belgium and other European countries stand up for themselves and pay the price to have strong militaries for defense of their countries instead of spending their treasures on welfare for many of their useless non working citizens and immigrants (same in the US) and relying on others for their defense. IMO, making a "deal" with Putin is like making a deal with the Devil.

I'm not one to complain or nitpick. But Belgium in 1914 with a 7.4M pop against Germany's 68M pop, or in 1940 with 8.4M pop against Germany's 86.5M pop, never stood a chance. Especially as all the great powers around us, made sure to keep us militarily and economically as toothless as possible. There is not a nation in Europe, that did not at one point invade or conquer (the region now known as) Belgium.

In both cases Belgium wanted to stay neutral, but we became just the highway for the Germans on their way to Paris. A fact perhaps not known as much, but in the 1st world war, not the whole of Belgium was conquered. After flooding the Yser river, the Belgian king with the remainders of his army dunked it out with the Germans, in a tiny part of the country around Ypres. (and yes, with a lot of help from our British, American, Canadian and many other friends)

Your remark on us spending too much on welfare for non-working citizens and immigrants, is spot on though. Couldn't agree more.

 

[MS 9x56]

russian army isnt as bad as people think

Tell that to the Ukrainian army.

 

[Pondoro]

Trump claim to gave destroyed Irans capabilities yet the missiles Rain down on Israel..