American Politics Discussion Thread

[Charr Babies]

WORD
Not much to say that I haven’t said a couple of posts ago. #4772

While we are on the topic of genocide - I want to put the spotlight on American blind patriotism from back in the days when we did in the Aboriginals. Paying good money for each kill, and making it easy and efficient they only need to provide scalps to redeem their rewards. You can carry a lot of scalps on a single person. We were able to rally our citizens to actively participate in the cause.

Men, women, and children scalps are rewarded with different amounts. It was good money paying up to $50 (about $2000 today, adjusted for inflation), per Injun. 
They were making a killing.

And the gears of the brainwashing machine started to turn. We taught this as a children’s game “Cowboys and Indians” to our young.

We have conducted nuclear tests on Indigenous lands, significantly impacting the health and environment of these communities. For example, the Western Shoshone territory in Nevada, known as the Nevada Test Site, has been the site of over 900 nuclear tests since 1951. Uranium mining and nuclear tests have left behind contaminated water, soil, and air, causing long-term health and environmental damage

I don’t want to get into a deep dive on the topic of Residential Schools and hospitals, but suffice to say we are still uncovering mass graves of murdered children. The last of these schools was only closed recently - in the 1980s in the US, and 1996 in Canada.

There are still survivors of residential schools.

Should we Free America!?

In light of the genocide of the Aboriginals, residential schools and hospitals, Japanese internment camps, etc., etc., 
I changed my Tibet signature to be more inclusive. 
Also added We Cash All Checks to our cheat sheet - Ref:#4772

FREE AMERICA? No, But Free Tibet - Wherever The Fuck That Is. [edited]

We Cash All Checks -  We Also Accept:
Disinformation - photos from other places to fake concentration camps in Tibet. ✓

Raping a country with war crimes, nuking another to submission, makes us the lesser evil.  ✓

Photos of concentration camps as solid proof of genocide ✓





EIDT: Someone PM'd me saying I shouldn't put so much trust in our freedom of speech. Changed my signature to "FREE AMERICA? No, But Free Tibet - Wherever The Fuck That Is"

[greenline]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/f...ce-from-us

I wasn't sure if there would be a moment when Trump would cross a turning point of some sort. But now I think this is it. The liberal post world war two consensus is cooked. It's all over now.

It's kind of silly to realize why it happened. Sure, Zelensky was berated. But this is almost certainly not the first time it has happened. I am sure there were a bunch of much worse words exchanged between US planners and Zelensky when it became clear that the big Ukranian counteroffensive in 2023 took a bunch of expensive NATO hardware and frittered it away (in fairness, there are a bunch of Pentagon people who thought that it would work who share part of the blame). People complain that Zelensky was being asked to sell his country's natural wealth and resources in exchange for security - but that was already happening under Biden's administration. Certain US companies were making out like bandits, buying up Ukranian land and agricultural assets for pennies on the dollar. What's different now is that this happened publicly.

FDR's post war order was a big facade. On the outside, everyone was supposed to espouse their love for freedom, democracy, and whatever else was on the NATO word of the day calendar. Behind closed doors, FDR would smoke a big cigar and explain to Churchill that he was being asked nicely to give up India, and various other colonies, and this would benefit various underground US spy agencies. And this continued for a while, but it had problems. The people who came into the offices and bureaucracies after FDR didn't 'get the joke'. They actually believed in freedom and democracy as magic things, rather than excuses for collecting power. So that led to dumping millions of dollars trying to democratize Iraq and Afghanistan, instead of just finding a sufficiently pliant sheikh or emir to oppose Chinese mineral interests in the area. In Ukraine, you saw the tension between old heads like Blinken, trying to balance the new-old goal of containing the Soviet Russians with realistic expectations of what donating some old Cold War equipment would actually achieve, and the complete nutcases who wanted to nuke Russia. Such tensions appearing in the open, on social media, increasingly made it harder for people to respect the need for the facade. So did the gradual deterioration of the American and European domestic economies.

Then, along comes Trump. Trump believes in intuitive solutions to problems. Trump sees that Zelensky is a lapdog, because he is. He lives or dies on US military support. So, he should act like it. No more pretending that being the president of Ukraine means anything! And he berates him on television for not knowing his place.

Why is that such a killer blow? Because the magic sauce that made this FDR world work, or any order of any kind, isn't money. It's respect. Vibes. Zelensky got humiliated on TV. Made to look like a fool. Humiliation is the sword that kills the dragon.

I don't know what exactly comes next, except that it'll be more stuff in this direction. US troops leave Europe. EU politicians scramble to make something happen. Probably they ban US social media, perhaps more exports. The old world dies, and the new one is born.

[darrelljs]

If Vance had kept his mouth shut like a good little VP, Zelensky wouldn't have had the opening to cross examine all the bullshit he was hearing (he certainly would not have done that with Trump as much as he likely wanted to).  Then it just kind of spiraled out of control.  All you needed to see to know Trump's mindset was his hissy fit on Hunter Biden putting poor Putin through a witch hunt. Honestly, this was a great outcome as Europe seems to have finally, hopefully realized they need to look to themselves for the foreseeable future.  Imagine if that took another six months?

America has always had a strong isolationist streak that's waxed and waned throughout the years, and I don't doubt we'll be more engaged in the future...I just hope more permanent harm isn't done such as NATO falling apart.

Darrell

[Charr Babies]

I LOVE HER!  Crystal Ball understands Zelensky - what it's like to be barely literate. 
16:39 - 17:21

[civac2]

The most likely outcome is that absolutely nothing of note will change.

Alot of this is just theatre.

[Charr Babies]

... Honestly, this was a great outcome as Europe seems to have finally, hopefully realized they need to look to themselves for the foreseeable future.  Imagine if that took another six months?

I have no idea what it means if it took another 6 months, what would happen?

The EU should have heeded the advice of Merkel and Macron advocating for European rearmament and greater military autonomy. However, they are too spineless under US's tyranny. Now, it is too late - As far as the Ukraine conflict is concerned.

The EU is already suffering significant economic setbacks due to the Ukraine conflict, to the point of economic collapse, with severe energy crisis, and high inflation.
Can they afford to prop up Ukraine without the US?
Where will they source the energy and production capacity needed?
What's the exit strategy? To what end, WW3, MAD?
What are the consequences of defying the mafia boss?


.

[Mjmd]

... Honestly, this was a great outcome as Europe seems to have finally, hopefully realized they need to look to themselves for the foreseeable future.  Imagine if that took another six months?

Can they afford to prop up Ukraine without the US?

What's the exit strategy? To what end, WW3, MAD?
.

To answer just two.

They 100% can, its just a question of political will. They just have to want to. Right now a lot of countries (including the US) were giving Ukraine mostly old stuff and replacing it with new stuff. If they delay their own rearmament to arm Ukraine with new they can (or heck if Turkey and Greece make nice and give Ukraine more old stuff at the same time). It makes logical sense as if Russia is busy in Ukraine its unlikely they will need their own new stuff soon, but people aren't logical. The bigger loss is IF (and I haven't heard and I doubt we will) the US stops supplying intelligence info. It also depends somewhat on if the US just stops itself providing support or prevents US weapons systems being sent. A good example would be F16 parts. There is a stock pile of those in Europe, but US can stop their export. There is a sliding scale of how much of a dick the US can be here and we will see where it ends up, but for the most part if we just aren't actively participating it will hurt, but its possible. 

Same as most long conflicts. People act as if wars always end fast with one side getting everything they want, when most of history isn't that. Its just what we learn because those expectations are the pivot points of history. The normal is exhaustion as slowly both sides move closer to peace terms both will except with one side giving up more depending on state of the war. I believe Ukraine will give up a lot (territory already conquered / war reparations), but will not move on security guarantees. Will RUSSIA move towards peace (IE will they accept they can't come back and try again later if Ukraine gets security guarantees). Maybe. Russia equipment reserves for a lot of categories are estimated to start running dry in 2026. That doesn't mean there will be 0 new, but they won't have old stuff to reactivate anymore which is where a lot of their material is coming from atm. As to all the people shouting "WW3". Do you know how many times Putin has threatened nukes ect if the west crossed "a red line" on Ukraine support? Ya neither do I because its a lot of times. It hasn't happened and it won't unless Ukraine starts pushing on Moscow which I think we can agree isn't likely. Is it more mad to give a dictator known for wanting more what they want and his pinky promise he won't do it again?

[darrelljs]

They 100% can, its just a question of political will. They just have to want to.

My job brings me in occasional contact with people I have no business meeting, and one such person said there was growing consensus that Russia does not intend to stop in Ukraine, and that stopping them there was a matter of European survival. It frankly seemed alarmist, but you see signs of it being true, e.g. countries lining up to place boots on the ground to enforce a cease fire.

Darrell

[Charr Babies]

Is it more mad to give a dictator known for wanting more what they want and his pinky promise he won't do it again?

To answer your question, that's a different believe on how this conflict started, and I don't want to spend another 100 pages circling back to the same argument over and over again. 

What I am hearing is we should cross the red line until the nukes start to fly? So lets take the nukes out of the equation because Russia is a pushover

Political will, meaning the extent to which citizens are willing to endure the hardships of a forever war?

What's the exit strategy? Is it just to cause more deaths and suffering on both sides(EU included)?

Personally, I believe it's far better to accept Trump's mineral deal and end the war, cut your losses, and move on. Only Ukraine has to endure setbacks (Gets divided up by the US,Russia and the EU; either way, it's already FUCK'd.), allowing the entire region to start building a better future. It's unfortunate that Ukraine, almost an innocent bystander, becomes just another sacrificial pawn - a condom. Live and learn - it may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal-Kissinger

The only crucial question is whether to get divided up now or face even more division after 20 more years of war.
(You bet the the EU would want a bigger piece of the pie when the dust settles)


.

[Mjmd]

I mean I get simple logic of "there is no evidence Russia was threatened because they have nukes" is really hard to understand. Or "see troop deployment actions on NATO border since start of war to easily disprove they don't actually fear NATO".

Yes, you are hearing that all the people doom speaking are wrong. Russia is not nuking over Ukraine or starting a war with Europe / the US over it. And yes if you let them threaten you this time, there is a good chance they are going to threaten you to get what they want another. This is very simple geopolitics / game theory. If you always give someone what they want because they threaten "GIVE ME WHAT I WANT OR I WILL NUKE YOU" they will probably keep doing it. If they haven't nuked you any of the other times you've "crossed a red line" sure they could this time. However, on the escalation ladder if we keep doing what we have been doing (giving a wide variety of aid) what makes you think they would now vs when we originally crossed? Russia has brought in foreign troops and that is probably the next serious step on the escalation ladder and they crossed it first. I don't think other than once treaty is signed, peace keeper from EU / NATO are likely mind you.

Exit strategy is yes to cause enough death that Russia will accept that Ukraine doesn't want to be invaded again and give in to let them have more serious security guarantees. As long as Ukraine gets security guarantees I believe it will make peace, but those are essential to it and Russia atm won't agree to those. How do you get Russia to agree to those? Again, you tend to focus just on the Ukraine side of the peace agreement, but there are two sides and both have to agree to peace. War is essentially aggressive diplomacy and slowly two sides move towards what is acceptable.

I believe Ukraine would 100% accept a peace that gives security guarantees. And to be clear the mineral deal as currently presented is NOT a peace treaty with Russia. Nor does it have security guarantees atm. That isn't to say they might not still sign to try to get more aid later, but its not "sign mineral deal = peace". I think Ukraine would take a peace deal where THEY keep 80% of their land. There is a lot of difference between being bound to Europe and being bound to Russia. They very much want to be with one of those and NOT with the other. That is kind of why there is a war atm.

I believe they will keep fighting because for them 70% with security guarantees is better than 80% with none. Would you make peace if you just thought Russia would just come back again? No. Again from a long term future for your country both from people being willing to live in your country and businesses being willing to invest you need strong guarantees. Also, Russia has a habit of reinvading countries. So do you demobilize and stop foreign aid now so Russia can come back when its rearmed and you are weaker? OR do you keep fighting and hope to get the security guarantees. From a Ukrainian perspective, you can see why its pretty essential. So yes I think Ukraine will fight for at least few more years before they accept peace without those and I think its easy to understand why.