Gentlemen,
Please let's try to bear in mind that one of Trump's big election pledges was to wash America's hands of any more foreign conflicts and bring peace IRO the Ukraine/Russia war. By now he should have no more than a passing disinterest in what's going on there. 'Let Europe sort their own problems out' is essentially what he said. I'm just saying keep that stated stance in mind going forward and see what actually happens.....
So far he hasn't brought peace to the Ukraine in 24 hours.
He doesn't seem to have a problem with Russia's desire to annex the Ukraine - after all Trump wants to annex Panama, Canada and Greenland.
The rest of the world doesn't see that as acceptable behavior.
Putin's habit of assassinating inconvenient people doesn't encourage more sensible world leaders to extend Putin's sway. Trump's bizarre enthusiasm for murderous dictators seems to blind him to this particular danger.
Am 31.03.25 um 07:03 schrieb Bill Sloman:
It's so peaceful on our grave yard. Just brought a new candle for mom!
and Gaza
Sooner or later, there must be a casino that does not go broke?
In 24 hours. It was an obvious lie when he made the claim - Trump's imagined deal-making skills are one more of his flattering self-delusions. "His" book - "the Art of the Deal" - had to be ghost-written.
Not that he had any idea of the actual problems involved.
The stance is that of half-wit with his head up his own behind.
Putin does seem to be exploiting Trump's intervention - he has finally got someone to talk to who doesn't see him as a murderous dictator intent on territorial expansion. Not that it helps much. Trump isn't quite idiotic enough to offer him the Ukraine on a plate, though Trump is stupid enough to think that the Ukraine should be stupid enough to offer the US it's mineral wealth on a plate without getting any security guarantees in exchange.
Am 31.03.25 um 09:39 schrieb Bill Sloman:
The guarantees would not be worth the paper they are are written on.
Remember the Budapest Memorandum of Dec-5-1994 where Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for safety guarantees from US, RU and UK? They had the 3rd largest arsenal on earth.
Foolish in retrospect.
Gerhard.
As far as I know these were outrageous proposals by Trump that Ukraine never agreed to. Does he think he can hold Ukraine to account for renaging on 'agreements' they never made?
That's where we went wrong, we should have nipped it in the bud. We still haven't learned. The longer we leave it, the more expensive in lives and materials it will be to push Putin's Russia back behind its own borders.
The Trump/Musk/Edison technique is to try lots of different things fast, but don't bet the farm on any one of them.
I suppose that was their inexperience in international diplomacy: You should *never* cede anything without an equivalent concession of the other party(ies). Reciprocity is the name of the game.
That's also why Trump cannot impose any tariffs without getting tit for tat.
Jeroen Belleman
Trashing around like a bull in a china shop is bound to make everyone keep their distance. That can't be good for cooperation.
Jeroen Belleman
History shows that nobody is very good at predicting human events. Our world is too chaotic.
A little teacup breaking might be handy now and then.
I design that way, break rules and try a lot of crazy ideas on the front end. Of course, I can blow up parts at small expense.
Making it even more chaotic isn't a good strategy.
Trump screws up on a larger scale than that. His business history includes several very expensive bankruptcies.
You don't actually design your circuits. You evolve them. Blowing up mass-produced parts is more acceptable than inviting Russia to to take over the Ukraine, or threatening to invade Greenland, Panama or Canada.
Europe has spent quite a lot on it's own defences. The US military-industrial complex would like it to spend more, preferably on buying American weapons from the US military-industrial complex.
<snip>On 3/31/25 7:16 AM, john larkin wrote: <...>
But surely you would have second thoughts about randomly removing components from a live circuit controlling a 32,000 ship turbine?
There's no point in being deliberately stupid, when the outcome is predictable. It's not interesting either.
I did automate a 32,000 HP ship turbine.
It's precisely what Trump and Musk are doing with DOGE, and if you are aren't interested you aren't into self-preservation.
So you claim. It seems to have been a long time ago.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required