Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
MOD OP EDIT: Please put general conversations about Trump here. Anything that is not exceptionally deserving of its own OP on this topic will be merged into this discussion. And let's keep things relatively polite. Thanks.
Comments (24161)
[tweet]https://twitter.com/theatlantic/status/1904875229165297848?s=46&t=IakyLvDoU1iHVTU4X-LNfg[/tweet]
In any case, the full release of Goldberg’s messages actually make the staff look pretty good, in my view. I was worried that Goldberg might not be lying this time, that there could possibly be “war plans” and the name of a CIA operative, both of which turned out to be false. But JD’s questions about why we are again subsidizing European defense makes me happy to see. Let the EU protect their own shipping lanes. The children there need to learn to stand on their own feet. It reminds me of the Schwarzkopf line “Going to war without the French is like going hunting without an accordion.”.
Goose, bear, Trump (below Vance) - has Benny Hill audio, too :D
[tweet]https://twitter.com/tweet4Anna_NAFO/status/1904681296355262627[/tweet]
More fun - Trump march :D
[tweet]https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1886822022837149729[/tweet]
My apologies for the spam, please delete if found inappropriate
Incorrect. Don't trust some stupid "Brainyquote" to get things right, NOS4A2:
(See here)
It wasn't Schwarzkopf, it was a puny undersecretary pushing the war that even Trump hates now, the invasion of Iraq.
This just reminds me that general Schwarzkopf actually had a full division from the French army that he went to war with. The French division "Daguet" secured the flank of the 82nd Airborne Division and of the whole combined army group:
But for people like you, @NOS4A2, one of the greatest American battlefield victories with least losses that the US ever suffered, the fact that it had French, British, Egyptian, Syrian, Saudi, Gulf State units fighting alongside Americans doesn't matter. All fucking parasites for you! So keep on hoping to destroy all the alliances that made the US actually great. Putin will be happy.
Here's the talking head, a Republican of course, that you referred to:
A swimming polar bear who adapted to the changing climate... just let it happen, please dear indifferent reality we exist in, let us laugh for once!
That was the time that "French Fries" were to be called "Freedom Fries" and when the French were "Cheese eating surrender monkeys", a quote from the Simpsons.
Waltz' childish attack on Goldberg has zero bearing on the serious error Waltz committed. It just shows how dishonorable he is. He ought to be grateful that Goldberg didn't publish what he'd learned. Imagine if Goldberg had published this (allegedly) unclassified information immediately.
Your irrational loyalty to the Trump administration is truly pathetic. You were unwilling to believe Waltz even committed the error and jumped to the conclusion (without evidence) that it was the "deep state". Waltz played you, and you don't even realize it: he's deflected your attention from his error to the irrelevant fact that the recipient is a liberal.
This is the least populated state in the US, Wyoming:
You can see why we're so desperate to have Greenland. It's too crowded here!
[I]
Reporter (audio voiceover): Your reaction to the story from The Atlantic that said that some of your top Cabinet officials and aides had been discussing very sensitive material through Signal and they included in an Atlantic reporter for that? What is your response to that?
Donald Trump (audio voiceover): I don’t know anything about it. I’m not a big fan of The Atlantic. To me, it’s a magazine that’s going out of business. I think it’s not much of a magazine. But I know nothing about it. [B]You’re saying that they had what?[/b]
Reporter (audio voiceover): They were using Signal to coordinate on sensitive materials—
Trump (audio voiceover): Having to do with what? Having to do with what? What were they talking about?
Reporter (audio voiceover): —with the Houthis.
Trump (audio voiceover): The Houthis, you mean the attack on the Houthis?
Reporter (audio voiceover): That’s correct.
Trump (audio voiceover): Well, it couldn’t have been very effective because the attack was very effective, I can tell you that. I don’t know anything about it. [B]You’re telling me about it for the first time.[/b][/i]
How could he have been unaware? Because he appointed incompetent people to important posts.
Thanks for the correction. But unlike you I’m not appealing to the authority, only the humor of the statement.
No, I’m willing to believe it, now that the evidence is clear that Walz’s account added him. Now the question is how Jeffry Goldberg was added to Waltz’s contact list, and subsequently the chat.
Goldberg isn’t a liberal. He’s neocon. He was a cheerleader of the Iraq war, and was the one who came up with the “sucker and losers” hoax. Rather than remove himself from the situation or notify other members of the error, he surreptitiously took screenshots and used them to embarrass all involved.
Indeed. That has nothing to do with the motives you assign to Goldberg.
What he said in his inaugral speech is something that he wants to do. He wants to enlarge the territory of the US. That's it. Let's really think about this. Because with Canada and Greenland the US WOULD BE THE LARGEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. The new US would surpass Russia in size. Heck, only Greenland is bigger than Mexico.
This is the delusional and sick ideas that a person for whom power has gone to the head can dream about. It has NOTHING to do with security or 4D Chess. In the international order based system territorial sovereignty is one of the most sacrosanct issues, but if people want independence, it can be accepted. And naturally in the case of Greenland, former national security advisor John Bolton, who actually had to look at this when he was in the first Trump administration, stated the obvious: Greenland would become independent (that's what the Greenlanders want) and the US would protect Greenland.
But this isn't what Trump wants. Trump genuinely wants the territory of the US to be larger.
The absolute insanity of this can be seen that the Republican party is AGAINST having Puerto Rico as the 51st state or giving the people Washington DC a vote because they fear how Puerto Ricans and people of Capital would vote! Well, what about 40 million Canadians, who don't want to be part of the US?
And if we put aside the Greenlanders, the Panamians and the 40 million Canadians, who in the hell in the US wants this? Who voted for Trump to have this? This is the total insanity here. Russians have been prepared again and again for supporting the imperial aspirations, but the US? Really? Right from the start, the whole issue with the Philippines created criticism.
What is wrong is in this World is that we understand that when it comes to Canada, Trump is hallucinating, but when it comes to Panama, that is something the US could really do. There is the historical example, and we wouldn't be so outraged in our cynicism if Trump did invade the country, unfortunately.
I think you need to focus on something else for a while.
But his embellishments about war plans and lies about CIA operatives do.
Are you saying the reason he was included in that group chat has something to do with what he has said in the past?
Now we all can be a judge about that:
No, sorry, telling even half an hour when you launch the aircraft is by all means crucial secret information. If intercepted, you do have time to people to take shelter, disperse, bring on the air defenses. And then people like Tulsi Gabbard deny everything.
Quoting frank
That Canada would join the US? Or annexed to become one state of the US? That wouldn't be delusional? Or NATO might be crumbling down?
Well, actually there's a nice talk about infinities going on the ordinary PF site, where I'm participating. Yes, mathematics and the philosophy of mathematics is one of my favorites.
None of that happened though, and I doubt this sort of leak or the use of the Signal app will continue given these concerns.
One would hope that.
But even if Hillary Clinton didn't send similar information, still, I think this all just shows the utter disrespect of the political leaders towards the military and the intelligence services, who for a reason take these issues dead seriously.
Fair enough, but these people are all former military. Unlike Lloyd Austin, Blinken, and Milley and their efforts in Afghanistan, leading to the death of soldiers, they took full responsibility for the debacle.
You're inconsistent. In the past, you supported the release of newswothy information:
Quoting NOS4A2
Regarding embarrassment: the officials committed the embarassing behavior. Goldberg was doing his job reporting it.
Again, nope.
Marco Rubio hasn't served.
Steve Witkoff hasn't served.
John Rattcliffe hasn't served.
And we heard from the DNI Tulsi Gabbard that no classified information was discussed. And then this:
So that you think is taking full responsibility?
Speaking of 'scumbag journalism', recall that Pete Hegseth used to be a part-time presenter on Fox News, where he used to declaim loudly that Hilary ought to be jailed for using a non-sanctioned server for official communications.
beats me why there are so many replies. They're pretty easy to starve.
Where’s that popcorn emoji when we need it?
Turkish student at Tufts University detained, video shows masked people handcuffing her
[sup]— Jake Offenhartz, Kathy McCormack, Michael Casey · AP · Mar 26, 2025[/sup]
ICE is above the courts?
Not the first such story. I don't fear so much for her (physical) safety at the moment, yet if symptomatic, this backsliding doesn't bode well. By the way, so much for free speech that the current administration has berated others about. Trust erosion. At least the press isn't outlawed when reporting this.
The arresting officers ultimately report to Lyons (ICE), who reports to Noem (Homeland Security), who reports to Trump. Who's above the courts here, if anyone?
Quoting Elon Musk · Mar 26, 2025
[tweet]https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1905074338161942616[/tweet]
Crash-testing the Justice and Congressional Oversight Subversion plan. Holding so far.
Quoting jorndoe
Musk looks after the bribery side of the operation. Trump handles the extortion side (by threatening to kill all government contracts for law firms who have been associated with his past prosecutions.)
I still do.
He was spying.
Then if you’re going to make such an accusation, quote one of them or describe how one of these three were disrespecting the military and the intelligence services.
Or was it this statement from Waltz? By far, the most newsworthy statement in the whole chat?
“Whether we pull the plug or not today European navies do not have the capability to defend against the types of sophisticated, antiship, cruise missiles, and drones the Houthis are now using. So whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes. ”
A military serviceman or an intelligence officer using Signal-app to forward timetables of future military strikes, an issue obviously classified in any sitution, would be severely punished. Likely that serviceman or officer would lose his or her job because of his or her recklessness of not following opsec-rules.
That these people don't give a fuck about such issues is the disrespect here. They can pray for the troops as much they want and hold up the flag, but such actions show actually how much they respect following orders.
Quoting NOS4A2
Wasn't it how to make Egypt and Europe pay?
Actually, it was Biden that didn't think there would be any need to form an international coalition to protect the Red Sea straights and Gulf of Oman from Houthi attacks (as was done dealing with Somali pirates). So the French deployed their own warships separately to defend maritime traffic. It was a great chance to build an alliance to contain Iran and it's proxies, but the US isn't in the business of forming coalitions anymore.
Since the US is had it with having any allies (except Israel, I guess) and just wants to cozy up with Russia, what is us to do other than rearm and think our security over?
That the source of your ire is a never-ending list of counterfactuals that you guys can pull out at will makes it look pretty silly, to be honest. Oh, it could have led to a nuke falling on a baby giraffe! You can’t find the disrespect so you have to make it up. That’s how far we’ve come.
Cozying up with a bunch of totalitarian nanny-states might not be in our best interests anymore. The cauldron of both communism and fascism is unleashing its next aberration on the world and perhaps cutting the chord is the right thing to do.
In neither case did the journalist do anything illegal. In both cases, journalists were given information. In Goldberg's case, he revealed none of the sensitive information until the administration lied about it - and accused HIM of lying.
It's an unequivocal fact that the administration screwed up, they lied about it, and attacked the journalist who did nothing wrong.
A responsible administration would admit error, investigate how pervasive it was, and put processes in place to avoid repeating it. Blaming the innocent journalist is deflection.
It’s guess it’s a shame he could only leak a successful military operation, and not something that would make the administration look terrible. In the scheme of scandals this sits up there with Sharpiegate in its stupidity-to-outrage ratio.
It’s true, Waltz or his staffer screwed up. I don’t deny that. But in terms of fuck-ups, it’s a tiny one. Big deal. On to the next outrage.
.
What’s funny is that his idiotic followers and spineless congress now have that part of the brain that accepts mistakes removed; thus we now have to endure endless speculation. This is all COMPLEX and NUANCED.
Lord how I miss the simple, straightforward days of Hillary’s emails…
Maybe in Anti-Trumpistan. But outside it’s gossip and scandal-mongering, and worse, malicious sabotage.
There’s not even an attempt to cover the dogmatism. They display it with pride.
Endless hypocrisy cycle.
Quoting tim wood
Yes, many say the same thing and question why we feed the troll.
But that's how the MAGA-crowd feels like. They are like the Brexiteers, who also cheered as they ruined their country and believed that once freed from the shackles of EU bureaucracy, they would enjoy the fruits of prosperity that "freedom" would give them. In a similar fashion the MAGA-crowd will be cheering all the way to the economic recession.
Best portrayal of the MAGA-mind has been alt-right cartoonist Ben Garrison, who depicts well the Trump worship and how the cult hates liberalism and democrats and that stuff.
How Garrison sees the Trump-team:
And what Trump is building:
And how rotten the Ukrainians are:
Quoting Roman Sheremeta (Case Western Reserve University, Chapman University)
As they say of the ancient Romans, "The Republic didn't fall in a day", something like that. Putin also violated Russian Criminal Code Article 353, by the way.
Because of what they are doing. It's not hate - that subjectivizes and trivialises the issue. It is an objection to the way that they are subverting constitutional norms and safeguards and indiscriminately destroying and degrading many legitimate functions of Government without any Congressional authority or oversight.
The Doctor will See you Now
The latest episode of stunning hypocrisy - NY Times points out that the Administration has refused to provide details of the flight times of the Venezulanen accused gang members on the grounds of 'national security'. But the leaking of war plans via an unsanctioned comms channel - no problem! Nothing to see here foks! What utter bullshit. Surely there must be a reckoning coming.
spy verb
1 : to watch secretly usually for hostile purposes
2 : to catch sight of : SEE
3 : to search or look for intensively —usually used with out
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spy
1 applies, and that’s the sense in which I used it.
The interesting thing about the interview I watched was the chasm between certain portrayals and that which presents itself to my own eyes and ears. I have I think listened to all sides, and though Musk may come off as weird, only one brand of portrayal appears completely unhinged and can be used to justify terrorism.
The so-called checks and balances are working just fine, if you can’t tell by the various injunctions and rulings, and any “subverting constitutional norms and safeguards” will be ironed out in court, the way it always has been.
He hung out in the conversation, watched with prying eyes, without notifying anyone of the mistake for many days. That’s secretive.
He then published and spoke about his embellishments in public. He is the perpetrator of many hoaxes and him and his publication are rabid anti-Trump propagandists. That’s hostile.
He was mistakenly invited and stayed, silently, eavesdropping, long past the time he realized he was not supposed to be there. The reason you’re fine with this is because you are ill-mannered and immoral, and you would do the same to others if given the chance.
If you had read the article you’d have a better understanding, because Goldberg describes his thoughts.
He’s the same guy who lied about the suckers and losers hoax, the Iraq war, and Russiagate. In this particular story he lied about the CIA operative, when in fact it was Ratcliffe’s chief of staff. A real honest and honorable man.
Musk's actions speak louder than words. He knows how to come across in interviews. As for 'ironed out in Court', Trump and Musk have already crashed through the guardrails on multiple occasions, a deliberate strategy crafted by Stephen Miller to 'flood the zone', knowing that the judicial system wouldn't be able to keep pace with the scale and rate of Trump's orders. There are now more than 30 legal challenges to Trump executive orders, but even if some are found illegal much of the damage may not be easily remedied. And, not co-incidentally, Musk is campaigning for the impeachment of 'activist judges', those being any judges who have the temerity to stand in the way of Trump's juggernaut - something which even the purportedly Trump-friendly Supreme Court has issued a warning on.
As regards the USAID and Foreign Aid, regardless of whether there was wastage and fraud, those funds that were held back had already been approved by Congress, and Foreign Aid in particular is scrutinized by no less that four congressional committees. If Congress hadn't been completely cowed by Trump, there's no way he and Musk could have perpertrated these outrages which are indubitably going to affect many millions of people in the developing world and beyond. "World's Richest Man Sets Records for Misanthropy" would be an appropriate headline.
Quoting NOS4A2
Classic victim-blaming. At first, Goldberg didn't know if it was a scam, and didn't really know until the actual action sequences that Hegseth posted. And - he's a journalist! He did what any journalist would do, and did it entirely responsibly. At first, he only posted that he'd been included - it wasn't until he was accused of being a 'bottom feeder' and liar that he posted the entire chain, which, in any case, MAGA was saying was not classified information (another lie on their part.)
The whole thing is a sorry saga and a complete indictement of the amateurish nature of the MAGA administration. There are many vignettes of Hegseth stridently demanding that Hillary Clinton be prosecuted for a far less serious offence than what he did. In any normal administration, he would have been dismissed on the spot.
Quoting tim wood
Here's a profile (gift link). He's a serious journalist, and The Atlantic is a highly-respected magazine, founded 1857 by Ralph Waldo Emerson and others, and now being published successfully with financial backing from Laurene Powell Jobs.
To me it seems like an acknowledgement that the delusions of Trump of annexing Greenland are in fact truly what they have seemed to be: totally delusional fantasies. And now the message from JD Vance is that "Denmark hasn't done enough for the defense of Greenland" and that "Greenlanders, if they choose sovereignty, should come closer to the US".
OK, let's just think this through.
For starters, if Greenlanders opt for sovereignty, that means that they aren't going to be part of the US. And what Denmark can say is the following: "We hear you loud and clear, we will put more to the defense of Greenland". And that's it. They'll put more resources to defend Greenland. What can the US say if a) Greenlanders don't want to be part of the US and b) Denmark reinforces the defense of Greenland?
Nothing.
As there is not even an Astroturf movement in the US for annexing Greenland, so this is a nonissue after what JD Vance said. Just one of those brainfarts of Trump, which he won't let to be. The US could perhaps engage the Greenlanders on having sovereingty, but that doesn't make sense. They could easily do the same thing with Denmark and the end result is that Greenland won't be a part of the US. If it's either independent or part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
So here the promise from the Inaugural address of Trump won't happen: that the territory of the US will become larger.
It still might happen in Panama.
It doesn’t matter if the funds had been approved by Congress, and certainly no one in Congress approved of waste and fraud. It is the executive branch that gets to decide the contracts and the staffing. They’re just not allowed to sit on congressional funds, and will have to use it appropriately. This was the ruling of the court, as well. So it’s already been settled.
Today, an appeals court overturned a lower court’s ruling that the dismantling of USAID was unconstitutional, because all cuts are approved by government officials, not DOGE, not Elon Musk, not Congress.
If Musk’s actions speak louder than words, then maybe we shouldn’t focus on his words, and focus on his (and DOGE’s) actions. The waste and fraud already removed has been extraordinary, and if they can balance the budget it might just save the government from insolvency, and people can continue to get proper aid.
It does. It is illegal. And no evidence of the alleged waste and fraud is ever presented beyond wild internet memes about millions of condoms for Gaza and the like. It’s all just rhetoric used to justify egregious behavior. All of DOGE’s boasts about how much money has been saved have been debunked.
Another myth! Trump has no interest in balancing the budget, and none of what Congress is proposing will achieve that end. Trump's proposal to cut taxes will far offset the amounts being saved by Musk's chainsaw, which will hardly make a dent in the overall financial situation.
https://www.npr.org/2025/03/06/nx-s1-5318072/how-much-money-has-doge-saved-budget-deficit-congress
https://wapo.st/42lkKbL
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksargen/2025/02/21/federal-spending-cuts-the-math-to-lower-deficits-doesnt-add-up/
The idea that DOGE is going to 'balance the budget' by indiscriminate cuts is a myth. Most of the cuts are ideological, driven by Trump's animus towards 'the deep state' (read: the state).
Within the limits marked out by the Legislature. Not all contracts are equally supported by law.
It might be illegal to you and some Obama-appointed district judge, but not to the Appeals court. And unlike every agency in American history, the official DOGE website posts its work, what it has found, what it has removed. And it has turned out that—if true—everything it has removed is a massive waste of money and spent on causes that contradict the administration’s objectives.
So all this rhetoric about Nazis and oligarchs and threats to democracy, which people use to justify terrorizing others and brandish swastikas—actual, not imagined, egregious behavior—is complete hokum.
Trump has repeatedly claimed he wishes to balance the budget, so claiming he has no interest in it is false on its face. And to be sure, Musk used the metaphor of a scalpel, measuring thrice cutting once when approaching the cuts. So the image of a chainsaw wielding Musk is just that, an image, not any reflection of the reality of what is occurring.
Musk basically said the proof is in the pudding, and that we can check back in by the end if he was right or wrong. So it’s not a myth because it hasn’t happened yet. It’s an effort towards a goal, at worst, a laudable and perhaps necessary one. And these mischaracterizations and conspiracy theories only serve to distort the truth.
I pronounced the fact he said what he said. It’s in the article the author wrote. You’re just ignorant of that fact, and ironically you had learn about these things from me.
I watched Trump reiterate his desire to have Greenland yesterday. He looked like a deflated balloon, with a glazed look in his eyes as he said the words. I suspected someone has told him it’s not going to happen.
In polls, 70% of Americans don't want to annex Greenland and 84% of Greenlanders don't want to join the US. Notice that even our own MAGA-follower here hasn't come to defend Trump's great ideas of annexing Greenland tells how the MAGA people think about this subject. It's not what they voted for Trump to do and spend time on.
How delusional can this get?
JD Vance put up his best effort to portray this enormous brainfart as being something logical. Yet that US officials went house to house looking for someone that JD and Usha could visit, and nobody would welcome them, tells what a disaster this has been. And the Greenlandic travel agency, Tupilak Travel, that at first agreed to host the couple, issued the following statement:
So Vance avoided a really nasty photo-op with frightened and angry Greenlanders demonstrating against the couple. Because last time when Trump's son was in town, the whole visit came as a surprise and the local drunks from a bar happily joined a photo op.
This actually simply shows the bizarre ineptness of the Trump White House.
Trump comes up with these brainfarts and the people closest to him, his own family members and the vice president, try to do something about it. Does he somehow use his State Department or the CIA to organize a scheme to get Greenlanders on his side? No. Trump is genuinely interested in the American flag flying over Nuuk, not Greenland to be an independent state with very close ties to the US, which would be something even more an irritant to Trump as the few Greenlanders could defend their country even less than Iceland can.
Hence this is a non-starter. Unfortunately this isn't the only brainfart that Trump has. His hatred against international trade is even more dangerous.
Speaking of brain-farts, “annexing” is the incorrect term and a conspiracy theory. The proper term in English is “cession”. American offers to buy Greenland have occurred many times and invoking the Monro doctrine has occurred throughout US history. For instance, the US occupied Greenland to protect it from the Nazis, who were occupying Denmark at the time. Given the constant shift towards totalitarianism in Europe at the present moment, perhaps Greenlanders would prefer better company after all.
Oh wait— it’s just more exaggerated, delusional bullshit. How shocking.
Trump pardons Nikola founder Trevor Milton
[i]Milton and his wife together made contributions last October to President Trump's reelection effort totaling over $1.8 million, federal records show.
CNBC reported that the pardon came two weeks after federal prosecutors urged U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos to order Milton to pay restitution of $680 million to Nikola shareholders, and another $15.2 million to Peter Hicks, a victim of his wire fraud.
Because of the pardon, Ramos could not order restitution of any kind.[/i]
Assuming the Kingdom of Denmark gives away Greenland. If not and Trump takes it anyway, that is an annexation.
Quoting NOS4A2
:snicker:
Perhaps in Hungary, something like that indeed...
This is what Trump's America is.
Is this what it means to “make America great again”?
Does a great nation spurn loyal allies and genuflect before tyrants? Does it seek to swell its size and wealth while cutting lifelines to those sick and starving abroad? Would a great nation embrace oligarchs, both domestic and foreign, while belittling and mistreating the most vulnerable? Would it hunt down homeless migrants and ship them without due process to foreign hellholes? Would it exalt kissing up while kicking down? Would it toss friends to wolves?
America’s true greatness always has stood on its goodness. Yes, we have sinned, often grotesquely — with centuries of slavery, Indian genocide, land theft and foreign invasions. The Vietnam and Iraq wars stain our national conscience, as do Jim Crow, segregation and Japanese internment. But when we have sinned, we also have repented, even if grudgingly and late.
When instead we have done good, we have shown our true greatness. By rebuilding Europe with the Marshall Plan; by enabling a dignified and healthy old age with Social Security and Medicare; by lifting barriers to the polls with the Voting Rights Act; by opening our doors to those of all colors and creeds who seek only to build a better life for their children. And, yes, by showing empathy toward the suffering and shunned.
Being good in all these ways has not made us chumps. We can be at once both generous and self-interested. Our soft power abroad draws on our most generous and noble acts and traditions. Our moral capital has won us tangible capital in both trade and military alliances. Holding true to our democratic traditions has drawn to our side the world’s wealthiest and most powerful democracies.
Why on earth would we scorn the friendship of Canada, the EU, Japan and South Korea for the meager recompense of Russia’s battered economy and beleaguered military? Why would we betray Ukraine, which has stood bravely against aggression?
Nor does being good mean being weak. Our military might empowers us to defend our ideals while supporting others who adhere to those same ideals. But being mighty is not an end in itself. Nor is being vast or rich. If we seize Greenland, Gaza or the Panama Canal, or bring our friends to their knees with massive tariffs, we may make ourselves richer in material terms even as we forsake our highest ideals.
Those ideals, the true roots of our strength, have made America good. And only by being good again can we be truly great.[/quote]
This is video of the chilling arrest by plain-clothes ICE operatives, of Rumeysa Ozturk, 30 y.o. PhD student at Tufts University, ostensibly on the grounds of her expression of pro-palestinian support. She was driven several hours then flown to an ICE facility in Louisiana for deportation. Her arrest has been challenged in court and her deportation has been stopped pending appeal.
Quoting Hegseth Brought His Wife to Sensitive Meetings With Foreign Military Officials · WSJ · Mar 28, 2025
[sup]— Sara Reardon, Jon Cohen, Jocelyn Kaiser · Science/AAAS · Mar 26, 2025[/sup]
Less and less separation, independence, ... Political imposition, scientific grants to align with government messaging, ... Creepy.
Seems doubtful that he could come up with his moves by himself.
Anyway, I guess we'll see. (Though hopefully not.)
[quote=TheGuardian; https://apple.news/Al9HlrsbjT5SN3Oh24KJntQ] Trevor Milton, the founder of electric vehicle start-up Nikola who was sentenced to prison last year, was pardoned by Donald Trump late on Thursday, the White House confirmed on Friday.
The pardon of Milton, who was sentenced to four years in prison for exaggerating the potential of his technology, could wipe out hundreds of millions of dollars in restitution that prosecutors were seeking for defrauded investors.
Milton and his wife donated more than $1.8m to a Trump re-election campaign fund less than a month before the November election, according to the Federal Election Commission.[/quote]
For a forensic analysis of Milton’s grift, see this episode of Cold Fusion TV. Basically he claimed to have invented a feasible electric freighter when he had no such thing, and staged outrageously fraudulent video demonstrations to fleece investors of billions. He’d be a viable candidate for the Trump cabinet in future, one would think.
The track record indicates an extremely low probability of truth, so this statement is meaningless.
A work of fiction, I understand.
This particular act wasn’t just a spur-of-the-moment meltdown of the mentally ill, as usually is the case, but the use of a mask and duct tape suggest some level of planning, so the owner guesses it was probably a neighbor or someone who followed him home.
The continued escalation of this brand of terrorism, now common to the fringes of the anti-Musk cult, will eventually come to murder or retaliation.
I don’t know what causes one to engage in political violence against innocent people and their property. I am unable to project myself into that state of mind. There was another video I watched where a woman was driving in a cybertruck and she was boxed in by another car, after which the driver got out and physically attacked her. She claimed to have bitten him to fight him off. These sorts of attacks are now commonplace.
One part hatred, one part mental illness, maybe. Who knows?
Funny how every nutjob killing kids at a school shooting or if they go postal is a lone gun man. But these are terrorists.
I also pray for our local useful idiots that someday their one braincell will finally be triggered into cleavage.
@NOS4A2 again high on something or dreaming. The budget won't be balanced, not for a long time.
Last year the federal government spent $6.75 trillion and spent far more than it collected, thus the deficit for 2024 was $1.83 trillion. That's 27%, more than one quarter of every dollar that the US spends. Social Security, Health care, defense and the interest on the debt took over three quarters of every dollar spent.
And then there's the accumulated debt and the interest on the debt, which is now a bigger cost than defense spending in the US even with the low interest rates, now averaging about 3,3% for the debt that the US holds:
And how volatile this might be, think that 3,3% is quite low in historical perspective:
It could easily be double of this, and that 6% would be a real difficulty.
So just think about that in balancing the budget. Good luck finding well over one trillion in "waste". And notice the effect that such decrease in spending will have in the economy. So balancing the budget is in my view, a fantasy now.
Then there's the Trump tax cuts: "Extending the expiring 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) would decrease federal tax revenue by $4.5 trillion from 2025 through 2034. The House budget resolution allows a $4.5 trillion increase in the deficit from tax cuts over the next decade so long as spending is cut by $1.7 trillion."
Sorry, but there's only one way this will end sooner or later. With a dollar crisis. Or then you can use that hefty inflation and use the inflation tax. Or then you can just default.
Unlike you I never said one way or another, like when you said the FBI was going to collapse. I’m fully aware that Trump’ and Musk’s policies are a massive gamble.
If I do predict I err on the side of pessimism, like I did with the election, so if I’m wrong I am pleasantly surprised. I collect these little predictions that are given to me and store them so when they prove to be right or wrong, I recognize whom said what. And so far you’re batting zero, my friend.
The difference is that others like you take their predictions of the future as justifications to apply actions in the present. It’s a racket, of course, because if they’re wrong they can say their actions prevented the future; but if they’re right they can say “I told you so”.
Someone is caught on camera slashing another person's tires. We cannot jump to the conclusion that the vandalism was carried out because the person is a Tesla owner. Slashing tires is a somewhat common vindictive act, and probability dictates that it's bound to happen to Tesla owners, just like it happens to the owners of other cars.
So, we need some statistics showing which types of cars are subjected to the largest amounts of vandalism. It might be the type which attracts the most aggressive driver type. Have you ever taken a baseball bat to a Dodge Ram? I saw a Honda Civic with slashed tires.
[sup]— Alexandra Witze · Nature · Mar 27, 2025[/sup]
3 out of 4 is high; actual numbers will be lower; packing up and moving isn't so easy, let alone to another country.
Still, some will be leaving due to the Trump administration, which might well turn out to be a(nother) loss for the US.
And, they're already deporting foreign students (2025Mar27, 2025Mar29), and some have cancelled studies in the US.
What a dumb mess.
Who does it all benefit anyway?
Sounds like you’re talking to yourself in the mirror, if there is a reflection that is and you’re not just talking into the void.
You operate on the idea that they have any clue about anything other than filling their own pockets. The US got rich on industry, not science, that's their idea without them ever understanding how the two fit together.
Fundamentally the people in power are conspiracy nutjobs. If you dig into how much conspiracy they believe in it's staggering. They're just fundamentally fucking stupid and they won by the votes of people who never read the news, but "always voted republican" and the other conspiracy nutjobs who are unable to behave according to democracy through the inability of the conspiracy theorist to conduct critical thinking about political parties and candidates.
Asking the 3o model to do an estimate of statistics on how many continuously hold strong conspiracy belief it sets the number as high as 20-40%. That would mean that democratic methods do not apply anymore and the US isn't operating as a functioning democracy, even disregarding the problems of how the US handles its democracy as a system. Even if the real number isn't that high, and considering that a percentage of all conspiracy nuts also has the extremists, even at a level of 5% of extreme conspiracy idiots would mean that if they're inspired to vote (which Trump did), they are enough to sway an election seen as how balanced and close most elections are in general.
Two months is a very short time, NOS. But I think the largest issue is the intentional unraveling of the alliance system that the US has had. Now, as we are talking about Trump, he could do these incredible 180 degree turns rapidly. For example, he could just gather around all of the US treaty allies and then say that this is the "tough love" to shove them to bear their part in the defense, yet that the US is still committed on it's treaties. That's all that Trump could do.
But when he doesn't do it, then you have journalists really contemplating the possibility of the US taking military action to annex Greenland or even Canada. Now it's still quite hypothetical. Yet it is one thing for Europe to carry more weight in the alliance, a totally different issue is to seek replacement for the alliance. Both situations call for larger defense spending, but in totally different situations. And when you have for example Germany starting a discussion of getting it's own nuclear deterrence, which it could btw. do rather easily if push comes to a shove. (See Germany debates nuclear weapons, again. But now it’s different.)
And let's see if Trump goes ahead with what the tariffs he has promised in a few days from now. Will we have stagflation, recession or deflation because of markets going down? Anyway, the next six months doesn't seem so rosy. That the stock market has gone down, but the dollar hasn't been the refuge is a bit alarming. Gold on the other hand has gone up quite a while. Which actually isn't good news (but something I've invested in for many years now).
The idea that international trade is bad is simply stupid. Yes, globalization has meant that manufacturing has gone to countries with far lower salaries and hence the production has been cheaper. Yes, indeed you argue that it has been an income transfer from the workers to the capitalists. Yet the idea of transforming this by tariffs is strange, because still the labor costs in the US are far more higher and hence it will cost more to produce in the US. Throughout economic history, the argument for trade barriers has been to create an industry capable of competing in global market. Then the attempt has been successful, when the objective is to be do away with the tariffs in the long run. Yet if the policy is to have tariff's and trade barriers to sustain and industry, that is a ruinous policy, which has been implemented a lot in Africa and third world countries.
Simply put it, mercantilism didn't work. But Trump thinks it will.
I think that's a reasonable assessment, ssu.
Trump's plan is a huge gamble and I'm prepared either way. Personally, I rather like the trade war so far. For example politicians here are forced to discuss eliminating “interprovincial” trade barriers in Canada. There are stiff rules and regulations between provinces in the country, making it almost necessary to ship products to the US rather than to other provinces. Politicians here are forced to talk about lowering taxes and addressing the cost of living crisis. The new prime minister even cancelled the much-reviled “carbon tax” of his predecessor and is looking to lower more regulations should he win the next election.
Trump isn’t the only one abusing tariffs, either, and other countries have seemingly turned Trumpian overnight. Some provincial leaders in Canada have banned alcohol from red states, or threatened to cut off energy, and has also tariffed the food. The government even bought billboards in the US that said ironically “Tariffs are a tax on American Workers” while mentioning nothing of its own tariffs on American goods and taxes on Canadian citizens. Another irony is that Canada has abused tariffs for most of its history, at least up until NAFTA.
But the rhetoric from the state-funded news and its dutiful followers has turned alarmingly nationalistic and anti-American, with pundits discussing bullshit like guerrilla warfare or joining the EU. So it turns out that, without America, the self-righteous veneer has slipped away pretty quickly and the underlying truth is exposed. It turns out that Canada cannot be a globalist socialist welfare state without the United States, and has to think of repealing its own totalitarian inclinations. Watching the EU scramble to rearm, I suspect it's the same in Europe.
It still amazes me how one man can have such a global effect and I fully welcome the shock to the system.
Like, how much further is he going with this before the people wake the fuck up?
The Fair Trade concept is definitely interventionist, but according to them it’s aimed to produce the conditions for free trade. It’s like the paradox of freedom, where freedom eventually leads to tyranny; one has to eventually fight back or lose it. I’m very interested to see if it works.
I didn't realize they'd said this. I'd heard Vance echoing stuff from Trump's previous presidential campaign, about jobs. It's hard to imagine Trump even caring about free trade. That's such an abstract goal.
The only way they can pull it off, as far as I can see, is if they do massive cuts to taxes, regulation, and spending to offset the cost of the tariff on consumers. If it doesn’t work we can close the door on economic populism.
I doubt it. Populism was born to be hi-jacked.
Quoting NOS4A2
They're talking about stagflation again. The fed didn't lower rates last go-round.
The idea is that when Mexican avocados become too expensive, Texan farmers will have a reason to devote some land to them. When the electronic thingy GE is presently making in Juarez becomes too expensive, GE will pull manufacturing of the item back within American borders.
Since most American manufacturing will be automated, American robot manufacturing will take off, and the network of homegrown stuff will continue to grow in a self reinforcing way.
What's being undone here is neo-liberalism.
Or people will stop eating avocados. It's a foodstuff easily replaced by other foodstuffs unless you insist on reading guacamole. Eg, demand substitution.
And GE might find it more efficient to sell in other countries than the US. Instead of moving production they change their logistics.
Since the tariffs are aimed at countries, other suppliers may fill the gap.
In short, we cannot tell and we do not have viable models to predict what happens exactly (not in this site, I don't know if something exists). The only certainty is price increases as a structural adjustment to the market of products subject to tariffs. If it would've been feasible to produce locally at a competitive price, it would already be happening. It isn't. So to bridge the gap, consumers will always have to pay more.
Edit: note that the orange idiot has claimed tariffs will both increase government tax income (paid by the importer, who will jack up prices for consumers) and create local production. This is, however, mutually exclusive. Either people keep buying abroad and the importer pays more taxes (which consumers effectively pay through higher prices) or they start producing locally, which means nothing is imported and therefore no taxes are raised. You cannot have both.
Quoting Benkei
They will stop eating avocados temporarily, but it's a very popular product in the US. I think demand will persist until American farmers start making them.
Quoting Benkei
They moved to Juarez after NAFTA specifically to take advantage of cheaper labor there. If tariffs eliminate that advantage, they'll likely come back to somewhere in the US.
Quoting Benkei
American farmers can't compete with Mexican farmers. A leftist would say that was the whole point of NAFTA: to cripple American labor and finally stomp out the power of American unions. In other words, what many don't understand is that increasing tariffs, especially on Mexico and Canada, is just going back to the way it was before NAFTA.
I'm not saying there are any guarantees that things will go the way Trump and Vance imagine, I'm just noting, especially to other Americans, that this is not rightist. The goal here is actually leftist, but American leftism died. That's what makes the present situation pretty fascinating.
I've read about this. Canada has to really think a lot over when suddenly there's an actual border where there hasn't been an actual one earlier. And then truly look at other trade relations with other countries.
Quoting NOS4A2
This is why I've said that talking about the 51st State and referring to the prime minister as "governor" is far more dangerous that it at first seems. Questioning the sovereignty of a nation state is like summoning up the devil. You either have extremely dark intentions, or you simply don't know what you are doing. Coming from an "expendable" country, we take these issues dead seriously.
Let's remind ourselves just how good the relations have been. Not only are there people like you or Canadians living in the US, there's about 1 million dual-citizens that have both Canadian and US passports. What is their role here?
The only lucky thing here is that Canadians understand that this isn't what Americans voted for when voting for Trump. But once the trade wars starts and if energy cuts from Canada produce rolling blackouts, the Americans can also have the grudge against the Canadians. It truly can get ugly.
Quoting frank
If it would be so, then you could compete with other manufacturers around the globe. But there's a scary alternative that can happen: once imports decrease, there is ample demand for the current manufacturers just to keep things as they are and not invest in tech. If American manufacturers aren't competing with the outside World, why would they have to extensively invest in technology and focus on competitiveness?
Quoting frank
What's being undone is Globalization. And in World history when globalization has decreased, bad things have happened.
Just think of this Philosophy Forum itself. Here people around the World are talking about philosophy and politics on a site that I assume has the actual servers in the US. (One can correct me if I'm wrong here.)
Assume if a tariff barrier is put up and any European or Australian that would want to participate on this forum had to pay a long distance call toll of yesteryear, meaning this posting would cost me let's say five euros and just to view this pages would cost me tens of cents per minute. You think there would be many participants for Europe or Australia then?
We just take it for granted, but this whole forum is something thanks to that "neo-liberalism" and "globalization". Do we want to throw it all away?
[sub]Fareed speaks with former Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt. They discuss Vice President Vance’s recent trip to Greenland, President Trump’s desire to “purchase” the territory and the future of the US-Danish alliance.[/sub]
On GPS: Former Danish Prime Minister: ‘We have stood by America for decades’
[sup]— Fareed Zakaria · CNN · Mar 30, 2025 · 5m:48s[/sup]
Yep, Trump/Vance's statements just don't make sense, unless their motives lie elsewhere, e.g. natural resources. If it's minerals, then set up business with the Greenlanders.
[sub]Fareed speaks with Russian political philosopher Alexander Dugin, who is known to some as “Putin’s brain.” They discuss the growing alignment between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin – and the origins of Russia’s war on Ukraine.[/sub]
On GPS: Russian philosopher: ‘Putinism has won in the US’
[sup]— Fareed Zakaria · CNN · Mar 30, 2025 · 7m:29s[/sup]
Ough. The imperialism is hard to miss. Since Dugin's latest book is about Trump's second presidency, he must be a quick writer.
Have you ever heard of IBM?
Quoting ssu
Correct.
Dugin's attitudes show the closeness of the ideas to the alt-right and Bannon.
The only sovereign the leaders of Canada swear an oath to is the King of England, his heirs and his successors. Canada is Crown Land.
That’s why all this sovereignty piffle is nonsense. Canada’s new prime minister was Trudeau's financial advisor during covid, was governor for the Bank of England during Brexit, and his American company Brookfield Asset Management is currently embroiled in a lawsuit where they are accused of buying bribery contracts and obtaining concession rights, charging massive tolls to poor Peruvian workers who had to use the highway to get to their jobs in the city. No one voted for him. He is not a member of parliament. He's a jet-setting globalist through and through, an actual oligarch. He'll look good flying away every weekend to do a summit in Whogivesistan, no doubt, and mingle with European elites, but I see no future for the average Canadian under his leadership.
His installing as prime minister is the swan song of globalism. The geography, the culture, the language, and potential for trade indicate that the idea of a north american partnership of some sort, along with Greenland, is far more appealing than continuing to exist as the vassal states of crumbled European empires. At least in the US, and in Finland, we can remove our heads of state, and talk about sovereignty.
For a few years they pretend all of America's trouble stem from Trump, so that when he's gone they can pretend America has been cleansed of evil, ready to once again take the moral high ground in the name of freedom and democracy!
The blinders go back on, and America can go back to its rapacious ways with full consent of its people. The powers that be creep back into the shadows, and the people go back to sleep.
Of all things to come out of Trump's presidency, this will be the worst.
Did you know Uncle Sam seems to have a pet peeve for conducting and supporting genocides?
Stimulating manufacturing and farming at home is a good thing in some ways, but as Benkei says prices will go up and what it stimulates might not be what we imagine. We had all this debate in the U.K. with Brexit, because we imported stuff easily from eastern and southern Europe. But because we sent back European workers and the young in our country don’t want to do a proper days work. Things have stagnated and we now import inferior product with dubious standards from third world countries.
Manufacturing has stagnated too, due to lack of skilled workers and the inability for manufacturers to truly operate from home in an interconnected world with just in time supply lines etc. Making it uncompetitive to compete with imports from non EU countries.
Once stagflation sets in, it’s difficult to budge and the shit that Doge is up to is throwing a spanner in the real economy which will be reeling from the tariff war and shortages in cheap labour.
So have you done any research into that shining US track record since the last time 'we were here'? Pol Pot, East-Timor, Vietnam, endless wars in the Middle-East, etc. and of course Uncle Sam's retarded pet monkey Israel? Do these ring any bells?
Quoting Punshhh
Probably so. Obviously I don't expect either of them to usher in the new utopia, but continental powers work fundamentally different from peripheral powers like the US.
The US functions on a basis of destroying what it cannot control - it has to, because of its inherently weak position - and evidently that frequently involves laying waste to unruly regions, and their populations if need be, in every far-flung corner of the world.
Continental powers have no such inherent incentives to go scorched earth on their neighborhood.
Why are some people afraid of globalization? Can you explain the basis of this paranoia?
Very well, if you insist. Even if it's April fools day.
However this goes far deeper and shows the times we are living. First of all, this is a Philosophy forum. People here are more aware of issues than people who just focus on their work, spare time and friends. Hence the debates here are some sort of Canary in the coal mine.
Yet the fact is that with Trump supporters there usually isn't a valid argument. There's just catchy sounding ideas that have no touch to reality. Starting from the trade war we are going to see starting in earnest tomorrow. Or that your or my European country is going towards totalitarianism and the freedom of speech is threatened by liberals and wokeism. And people believe it. It think the interview that gave us between Fareed Zakaria and Aleksandr Dugin is very telling, even if Zakaria was trying to push Dugin to say something he didn't. Yet when you also listen to the Witkoff interview with Tucker Carlson, the real threat to Europe should be evident.
And I don't insist on anything, it's not and shouldn't be seen as a moderator comment. Just an observation that your time could be better spent.
Doesn't the UK do automated manufacturing? Wouldn't that help the situation?
It's remarkable how closely all of this resembles the vague foundation for the movie Civil War. The only thing missing is a dismantling of the FBI and then an attack on US citizens and it will be pinpoint accurate to that premise for a president.
It's always the Americans that have no clue about what their own country gets up to.
Quoting tim wood
Pol Pot was possibly even worse, and guess who he was funded by?
And that's just one example.
Quoting tim wood
Thanks for the correction, though.
Covid lockdowns were a cliff edge too. The economic repercussions of which are still going on, or are yet to be realised. Add to that the cliff edge of the financial crisis (2008) and the U.K. is reeling from 3 major economic shocks in the last 17yrs.
Note that he won’t address what I said, won’t make an argument, or explain what I said was wrong.
Your point is well taken that it's precarious for any country to try to go it alone. The world we live in is a result of integration and we take that for granted until it's gone. The only extra point I would make is that NAFTA and other efforts to transfer the locus of economic activity to Wall St. was also a cliff edge. It was just a generation ago, so people don't remember the pain of mass lay offs and whole industries just disappearing. Americans sat helplessly watching their jobs going overseas. We were independent. That's the problem with the argument that the status quo grew naturally. It didn't. It was contrived, and for a very specific reason.
That's good to hear.
Quoting Tzeentch
Especially when it's something that they actually did do well, which helped the World. Because they do hear about the things they did do wrong.
Funny that those good actions are usually attacked and absolutely hated especially by the MAGA-people:
But that all might be a distant memory in the future. Some Americans see all the above as failures. Actually the repulsive cartoons of Ben Garrison depict extremely well the how the MAGA-cult and the alt-right sees the World around them and their President. Notice the Vladimir Putin as the dove of peace.
I can only speak for myself, but my own paranoia is the compression of space, that distant events and people can influence local and regional affairs. Covid is one of the more recent examples, but also war and economy. If the men of Davos had it in them to implement an agenda, like Agenda 2030, it means that a few hundred men could decide the future of the entire global population.
The US is exceptional. So exceptional in fact, that they get to commit a little genocide every now and then. Just a little. Or a lot.
But hey, those are just details. No use in getting hung up on a little genocide.
Anyway, on with the deportations of foreign agitators :ok:
I'm having an alright day. Whenever @ssu posts colorful pictures and comics, my day is never really bad.
We aren't deporting Americans; we are deporting guests in this country who are invited in and proceed to spit in the face of their hosts. I mean deporting the ones on visas. The ones who were graciously allowed into this country to study at top universities and utilize the resources of this country, and then end up destroying those very institutions through riots and crimes. The ones who protest in support of designated terrorist organizations that capture, torture, and kill Americans.
Many agree with that view, considering the number murdered at the hands of the Khmer Rouge must be seen against a backdrop of a population of only 7 million people, making it one of the worst genocides in human history.
Of course, being the well-informed and non-ignorant American that you are, I'm sure you already knew that.
But don't let me keep you from your 'worthy' opinions. :vomit:
Well, there is the policies the US has done in the Middle East, in Central America and so on. Indeed much criticism there, which I've said myself. US Middle Eastern policy has been a giant horrible train wreck. In Latin America, the history is quite ugly also.
As I've said, Russia can have cordial relations for example with other BRICS countries and has had close ties since the time of the Soviet Union with India. I'm sure Putin hasn't been overtly hostile against India. Why would he be?
Yet it seems so utterly difficult to find and accept both positive and negative aspects from the policies of one country by some commentators here. Some can criticize one country (like US), but never say anything bad against another (like Russia), which simply shows that one isn't objective at all.
:smile:
Mao.
So... what is your point to @tim wood?
Name one what? American or visaed deportee?
These people are given documents, but their rights are not equivalent to those of citizens. You seem hazy about what those rights exactly are as well. Trump is doing what is legal.
They are guests in this country. If you allowed me to sleep in your living space, would you be intolerant if you kicked me out if I tore up the furniture? Or if I openly supported those who kidnapped and killed citizens of your community? Whenever the example is personal, these things become more apparent. I'm an American. America is my home. I don't like inviting guests into my home who proceed to destroy it or advocate its destruction.
And yes, they've destroyed universities across the country. They've caused millions in property damage to buildings, screamed down speakers, and disrupted learning environments by barging into active classrooms and screaming their heads off about Palestine.
It is American to have tolerance and to be nice to guests, but it is also American to stand up for oneself when our hospitality is being taken advantage of.
Quoting tim wood
How do we know there's no innocent men in prison right now? Guess we should abolish prisons.
You've got the gal to criticize my opinions, and you need citations to know what the fuck even happened?
How convenient that Yale university has a webpage dedicated specifically to sources on this topic...
U.S. Involvement in the Cambodian War and Genocide
Several books by Michael Haas - nominee for a Nobel Peace Prize by the way...
Cambodia, Pol Pot, and the United States: The Faustian Pact
Genocide by Proxy: Cambodian Pawn on a Superpower Chessboard
And of course what was confirmed by WikiLeaks documents...
Wikileaks: US supported Khmer Rouge to weaken Soviet-allied Vietnamese communists
Oh, why not throw in something recent as well while we're at it...
Delayed Justice: How US Actions Paved the Way for the Khmer Rouge and Prevented Justice in Cambodia
Tip of the iceberg.
Ah, I see. So Uncle Sam is just about as bad as Mao. Got it. I sort of agree, actually.
Every nation has got its black pages, but there isn't a single one that seems so eager to repeat them as the United States.
— Punshhh
I think you are somewhat lacking in powers of imagination. Such states tend to use mass starvation rather than active genocide, it’s less obvious. Also genocide is not a good marker for the difference we would find. All global treaties would be abandoned, the world would become a competing world of warlords. Populations not offered protection(for a price), by a warlord would be left to the dogs. Again mass starvation, war, failed states across wide regions. And if a population is lucky enough to have protection, they will be exploited little better than slaves with few rights. While their land will be laid waste by unregulated exploitation of resources. And when climate change kicks in, welcome to Mad Max.
Good. Me too.
The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine
Original:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/29/world/europe/us-ukraine-military-war-wiesbaden.html
I know something about the history in South East Asia. Do you?
Pol Pot was supported by Mao and finally the Vietnamese kicked him out and into the jungles of Cambodia until even his supporters got enough of him. Vietnam retreated from Cambodia I think in 1989. And as usual, the US fucked up it's inconsistent Machiavellian policies and operations starting first with the Sihanouk regime and then with the fear of the Soviet backed Vietnamese. What else is new? Giving a list of literature on the US involvement doesn't refute in any way the fact that the major supporter of the Khmer Rouge was Mao's China.
Just to put into context the pathetic actions of the US in South-East Asia after the withdrawal from South Vietnam, here's a factoid from WIKILEAKS:
But did they give aid, just like the US gave intel to Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war? CIA did many stupid things, but then one has to look at the real military supporter of the Khmer Rouge.
Yet this doesn't seem to get through. Of course, again everything, EVERYTHING has to happen because of and only by the Americans, as there are no other actors, only proxies or victims. Would you even know or notice the Cambodian–Vietnamese War that actually put the end to the Khmer Rouge? And that this resulted in the Sino-Vietnamese border war? Unimportant because the US wasn't involved and hence something that the American historians won't look so hard into.
Anything without the Americans seems to be totally meaningless for you. That's your biggest problem. And this is the insane navel-grazing that either some Americans and anti-Americans fall into where they cannot see any other actors than their hated USA.
That's the inevitable result of modern technology. Would you prefer that we return to a pre-industrialization society?
Looks like a response to North Korea's involvement.
Wow. Even handing out money didn't work. Which is totally disgusting and I'm really happy of the outcome.
Seems the time for Musk to quietly leave the arena and stop making it worse for his companies.
I think quite the opposite is the case, actually.
Every time I point out what kind of an awful country the United States is, people look for ways to twist the facts so they don't have to acknowledge its long list of transgressions.
Anything not to have to face the fact that the US can compete with the absolute worst humanity has had to offer.
The US commited genocide in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, in all three cases murdering large percentages of their peasant populations through indiscriminate carpet bombing and chemical warfare - each several orders of magnitude above what Israel is doing is Gaza, I remind you. The total destruction of the Cambodian societal structure was a direct cause for Pol Pot's power grab, which the US then supported in full knowledge of what Pol Pot was about.
The reason you feel the need to shift the topic away from America's role is because you are unable to accept it.
Then we could have a conversation of the Bush policies and the response after 9/11. The 2003 invasion of Iraq is quite different from Korea and even from Vietnam, or the retaking of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein.
Quoting Tzeentch
Is that really so?
It was Lon Nol, that the US backed up in the fight against Pol Pot. And Sihanouk claims (likely correctly) that the coup against him by Lon Nol was backed up by the CIA.
Only for the US to then, far later, to be in good terms with Sihanouk again. Which just shows how clueless the US can be in it's machinations. The US is simply one actor, even if important, that is one among many and often doesn't get it's agenda through. Here's Sihanouk with Reagan later.
So get your history and historical perspective correct, Tzeentch.
Quoting ssu
Quoting Elmhirst, 2023
-
Quoting Henry Kissinger
Quoting Zbigniew Brzezinski
-
That Kissinger quote is from 1975, by the way. If you know your dates, you'll know exactly what that means.
What you're inadvertently engaged in is the denial of responsibility for genocide - apparently not something that only Likud-sympathizers are guilty of.