Political Posts

[Xerxes]

Canada like most European companies have been not contributing as much to NATO as they should. Facts are facts. 
 

That said the “spin” that U.S. pays for Canadian protection specifically (I.e NORAD) protection is nothing more than an Trumpian invention. U.S. if anything had been using Canada as a shield. You think NORAD is there to help the farmers of Edmonton and the city dwellers in Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa. 
 

Also U.S. does not have radar systems in Greenland for the local’ protection, it is there to “see” incoming ICBM for its (American) protection. Or do you believe the radar system currently in Greenland are there help bunch of Greenlanders riding on dog sleds. 
 

U.S. forces were not involved in the wars of Middle East for some Arab sheikh out of the kindness of their heart.  It was to be ensure the flow of oil and stability in the Persian Gulf. Only recently U.S. has become an hydrocarbon superpower. Prior to that it had to secure its energy security abroad. 
 

 

Are we now pretending that none of this happened. 
 

 

I have never seen “western narratives”

rewritten so fast. It is concerning. 

 

[Xerxes]

6 hours ago, Blugolds said:

If you cannot criticize policy/action/behavior of BOTH the left and the right, then you arent thinking deep enough IMO. IMO this should be ENCOURAGED rather than labeled as a sellout, rhino etc. Both parties will get some things right and some things wrong, there doesnt have to be this ride or die mentality, its messed up. 

There has to be a “market” for criticism. We should not feel forced to take a position as if everything is binary.

 

On a certain geopolitical topics, when I talk to friends, the one that is pro-A sees my view as pro-B, and on the same exact topic with another person, the one that is pro-B sees me as pro-A. 
 

Everybody is looking to reinforce their biases. 

[Xerxes]

6 hours ago, LC said:

 

Many Italians and Germans left Italy/Germany for US/CA to escape. I don't know German history as well as Italian so I won't speak to that - but many Italians, particularly in the south, fought tooth-and-nail against Mussolini (and later Nazi Germany). And these were poor and working class people who you would imagine as prone to populism. Many viewed the fascist party as an usurper of the Kingdom of Italy.

that is interesting. I always figured the opposition in the south was more due to the don of dons and the likes having a freer hand with the relatively powerless monarch far away in the north.
 

Whereas Mussolini was about centralization ?
 

The Italian monarchy was pretty young, perhaps 100 years old at best. 

[cubsfan]

12 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

Canada like most European companies have been not contributing as much to NATO as they should. Facts are facts. 
 

That said the “spin” that U.S. pays for Canadian protection specifically (I.e NORAD) protection is nothing more than an Trumpian invention. U.S. if anything had been using Canada as a shield. You think NORAD is there to help the farmers of Edmonton and the city dwellers in Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa. 
 

Also U.S. does not have radar systems in Greenland for the local’ protection, it is there to “see” incoming ICBM for its (American) protection. Or do you believe the radar system currently in Greenland are there help bunch of Greenlanders riding on dog sleds. 
 

U.S. forces were not involved in the wars of Middle East for some Arab sheikh out of the kindness of their heart.  It was to be ensure the flow of oil and stability in the Persian Gulf. Only recently U.S. has become an hydrocarbon superpower. Prior to that it had to secure its energy security abroad. 
 

 

Are we now pretending that none of this happened. 
 

 

I have never seen “western narratives”

rewritten so fast. It is concerning. 

 

 

Huh??  You lost me at Canada not paying their fair share.  The rest is excuses.

 

We all know why. Canada won't divert money from their welfare state.

[Xerxes]

5 hours ago, james22 said:

 

And I'm quite sure most outside the US don't understand how little Americans give a fuck what we're thought of anymore

 

no problem. That is fair.  
 

but just don’t rewrite history. 

 

[mcliu]

Has anyone tried switching from a Tesla to ICE car or non-Tesla EV? It’s like going from an iPhone to a BlackBerry or flip phone..

[Paarslaars]

1 hour ago, Charlie said:

But tariffs make the domestic alternatives more attractive.

Not in the case of China, when domestic alternatives are 200% more expensive, 20% tarrifs aren't going to cut it. That is just a hidden tax...

Edited March 12, 2025 by Paarslaars

[Xerxes]

General comments for our southern neighbours: 
 

look folks, just like it is not U.S.’s and U.S. taxpayer responsibility to keep the world safe 

 

it is not the rest of the world responsibility to be blamed because once upon a time U.S. sought the imperial purple, led the whole world for its geopolitical and national security gains (which also benefit its allies), but now decided to de-throne itself. 

 

FDR, Truman, Nixon, Johnson, Bush, Clinton, Reagan etc were all American presidents. Elected to the office by the will of the people. They did your bidding. 
 

at least own up to it.

if you cannot even own up and acknowledge that very basic statement than we are not even on the same wavelength 

[John Hjorth]

2 hours ago, rogermunibond said:

He's lost Jamie Dimon

 

 

Roger [ @rogermunibond ],

 

'Lost him'? - He has never had him anyway!

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, Xerxes said:

General comments for our southern neighbours: 
 

look folks, just like it is not U.S.’s and U.S. taxpayer responsibility to keep the world safe 

 

it is not the rest of the world responsibility to be blamed because once upon a time U.S. sought the imperial purple, led the whole world for its geopolitical and national security gains (which also benefit its allies), but now decided to de-throne itself. 

 

FDR, Truman, Nixon, Johnson, Bush, Clinton, Reagan etc were all American presidents. Elected to the office by the will of the people. They did your bidding. 
 

at least own up to it.

if you cannot even own up and acknowledge that very basic statement than we are not even on the same wavelength 

 

When NATO members made a commitment in 2014 (11 years ago), to meet their spending commitments - it should not take until 2032 (in Canada's case) to get there.

 

Free free to spin this disgrace all like - but facts are facts - however embarrasing it may be.

 

at least own up to it.

[Xerxes]

 

38 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Free free to spin this disgrace all like - but facts are facts - however embarrasing it may be.

 

at least own up to it.

owned up 2 hours ago and even acknowledged by yourself. 
 

how are we doing on your side. ?

 

[LC]

The impact of 1930s politics and the war in italy was pretty disperse - partly as you point out  due to Italy's inconsistent government over the centuries. Here is a good medium-length read that tries to summarize:

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/a-tale-of-two-famiglie-resistance-and-atrocities-during-the-italian-resistance/

 

There is a great website that has video interviews from old partisans, it's in Italian unfortunately but if you speak the language the stories are pretty good:

https://www.noipartigiani.it/

 

 

[John Hjorth]

Mike [ @cubsfan ],

 

About the NATO members' defence spending budgets, you are right.

 

Spain [holding its head low, pretty much saying nothing all the time], Italy [sending this white dressed, high heeled, talking, lady [Meloni] every time there is a meeting, giving interviews over and over again], committing nothing to the cause, and then our our foot-dragging friends up in Canada, who now suddenly have their hands full! [Trump-wise]

[flesh]

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

General comments for our southern neighbours: 
 

look folks, just like it is not U.S.’s and U.S. taxpayer responsibility to keep the world safe 

 

it is not the rest of the world responsibility to be blamed because once upon a time U.S. sought the imperial purple, led the whole world for its geopolitical and national security gains (which also benefit its allies), but now decided to de-throne itself. 

 

FDR, Truman, Nixon, Johnson, Bush, Clinton, Reagan etc were all American presidents. Elected to the office by the will of the people. They did your bidding. 
 

at least own up to it.

if you cannot even own up and acknowledge that very basic statement than we are not even on the same wavelength 

This is cool, I get to speak for mericans. 
 

Ya so I’m not sure exactly what your point is, if it’s that we decided to do this or is it that we needed to? Not sure how to fairly arbitrate this. Would you have done it? You could have helped more. What would have happened if we didn’t? Maybe you can help me here but having a hard time drawing a straight line to , we chose freely to do that. It seems that we all joined together but we paid disproportionately for it? Are you saying we are more successful because we led and spent a f ton of money to lead? Like the counter factual would be that you could have led and been more successful if you had spent a f ton of money on defense and trying to improve the world? 
 

For the sake of us down here, I’ll just concede and say, yes , we did lead forever, y’all benefitted from it, now we would like to continue to lead but can’t afford to pay your way too. That ship has sailed, we’re not blaming you I mean shit, who doesn’t want a free ride? I’d take it any day. Smart of y’all to do so. That’s over. There’s new and serious competition on the horizon and we’re going to lead us all to the promised land but moneys gotta be spent on ai, energy infrastructure of all sorts, military tech, etc so that none of us ever have to seriously worry about those that are not aligned. We need total independence so that we can’t be controlled. We need to do some serious strategic on shoring which means we’ll have to buy less from others. When we continue to win we’ll share it all with you and not others. 
 

we’ve voted to end the previous version. The new version means we have to negotiate. We aren’t asking to be paid retrospectively. We are saying look, there’s  money in trade, money in defense, etc and they’re all part of the renegotiation. If we are going to pay your defense you will be compensating us somehow, it may be in trade or otherwise. If you’re not going to pay us for defense and you’re not going to pay for it directly, why would we want to partner up with you for defense?   How is this in good faith competition and comparative advantage on a level playing field? 
 

Im not sure that I understand the word blame how you used it. If blame is pointing to facts that have cost us tens of billion.. that’s not a fair use. Otoh trump uses heated rhetoric so I guess you mean when he says things like “they are ripping us off”. If that’s the case, I agree, he doesn’t need to say that and could do things differently. That does sound like blaming. Insofar as you’ve promised to pay for something and haven’t paid for it.. blame would be accurate? However maybe he does need to say that to get elected idk politics is crazy. 
 

 

I’ve lived for a year in fontainebleau and barcelona.. just a couple months in Canada … I’ve felt disliked by Europeans since I first went there in 2001. Back then it was something about bush bad, I was 22. I don’t expect them to like me more now that they have to pay their own bills.. their politicians will never say it that way, they’ll just hear nonsense, like trumps says “grab em by the pussy”and believe it like everyone else. Is what it is. Hopefully it’s just an acute phase. 
 

Anyways kinda rambling here. 

[Red Lion]

4 hours ago, flesh said:

 

 

most of us know the benefits of free trade by now, this video will familiarize you with both sides. Notice who won. It’s not simple. 
 

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.“

I wish we had debates like this on national television in the US. 

[Xerxes]

3 hours ago, flesh said:

Ya so I’m not sure exactly what your point is, if it’s that we decided to do this or is it that we needed to? Not sure how to fairly arbitrate this. Would you have done it? You could have helped more. What would have happened if we didn’t? Maybe you can help me here but having a hard time drawing a straight line to , we chose freely to do that. It seems that we all joined together but we paid disproportionately for it? Are you saying we are more successful because we led and spent a f ton of money to lead? Like the counter factual would be that you could have led and been more successful if you had spent a f ton of money on defense and trying to improve the world? 

 

This would be a 1,000 pages long PhD thesis looking all the different permutations, beyond my puny mind. I have no idea if you would have been more or less successful in a what if scenario. 

 

U.S. chose to lead and stand-up for the Western civilization in the 1940s. But it was not all charity, Marshall Plan may have been seem like charity, but I promise you it was done as an investment with an eye on the Soviet Union and how easy a war ravaged Europe would succumb for the communism. If there was not Soviet Union, Europe would have had no Marshall Plan. 

 

Everything since than, it has been to reinforce its global hegemony, through wars, coup d'etat, interventions, military or economically etc. I hope I am not breaking news here. Whoever voted the neoconservatives to power 20 years ago, are probably the same people that are now donning the MAGA hats. They had their fun and a go at gunboat diplomacy and nation building, now they are having a go at being isolationist. 

 

U.S. presidents were elected by the American people. Their decision represents the will of the people. Right or wrong. As an example, it is not Canada' fault that U.S. had to go off the gold standard, because Vietnam was costing too much. Who elected your presidents then and what was their policy vis a vis the dreaded RED threat. Were those policy and views vis a vis communism overblown. Seem like it. Just a decade later, a new approach was made.

 

You collectively voted in those leaders, and lived under that umbrella, thumb your chests for them, and your corporations benefitted immensely because of it as new markets opened up. Not too mention that flow of oil that fueled the growth of your economy, even as you militarized the region. .... and we don't want to even talk about the mess in the middle east either.

 

So own up to your own past, the things you have done, ... before demanding to annex your allies and wipe out their identity, through economic subjugation, as sort of a weird bizzarro payment, because it costs to much to maintain the empire, and you don't feel like doing it anymore. ... and then having the audacity to threaten more retaliation, because Canada is not rolling over fast enough.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, flesh said:

For the sake of us down here, I’ll just concede and say, yes , we did lead forever, y’all benefitted from it, now we would like to continue to lead but can’t afford to pay your way too. That ship has sailed, we’re not blaming you I mean shit, who doesn’t want a free ride? I’d take it any day. Smart of y’all to do so. That’s over. There’s new and serious competition on the horizon and we’re going to lead us all to the promised land but moneys gotta be spent on ai, energy infrastructure of all sorts, military tech, etc so that none of us ever have to seriously worry about those that are not aligned. We need total independence so that we can’t be controlled. We need to do some serious strategic on shoring which means we’ll have to buy less from others. When we continue to win we’ll share it all with you and not others. 
 

we’ve voted to end the previous version. The new version means we have to negotiate. We aren’t asking to be paid retrospectively. We are saying look, there’s  money in trade, money in defense, etc and they’re all part of the renegotiation. If we are going to pay your defense you will be compensating us somehow, it may be in trade or otherwise. If you’re not going to pay us for defense and you’re not going to pay for it directly, why would we want to partner up with you for defense?   How is this in good faith competition and comparative advantage on a level playing field? 
 

Im not sure that I understand the word blame how you used it. If blame is pointing to facts that have cost us tens of billion.. that’s not a fair use. Otoh trump uses heated rhetoric so I guess you mean when he says things like “they are ripping us off”. If that’s the case, I agree, he doesn’t need to say that and could do things differently. That does sound like blaming. Insofar as you’ve promised to pay for something and haven’t paid for it.. blame would be accurate? However maybe he does need to say that to get elected idk politics is crazy. 
 

 

If U.S. wants to abdicate its global leadership role. So be it.

People have demanded change. Make it happen.

 

And I (and anybody else) have no problems with U.S. discussing legitimate and unfair trade practices. But we all know there is more to it than that. The Trump Administration is seeking a casus belli.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, flesh said:

I’ve lived for a year in fontainebleau and barcelona.. just a couple months in Canada … I’ve felt disliked by Europeans since I first went there in 2001. Back then it was something about bush bad, I was 22. I don’t expect them to like me more now that they have to pay their own bills.. their politicians will never say it that way, they’ll just hear nonsense, like trumps says “grab em by the pussy”and believe it like everyone else. Is what it is. Hopefully it’s just an acute phase. 

 

 

I was in India for three weeks, right after fresh off the Canadian-Indian spats.

 

All the Indian tour guides I met, looked at me in a funny way, ask me about Trudeau by name. Some of them even asked me, "if Canadians don't like Indians"; i had no idea where that came from. In my book that shit is between government not people;

 

But it wasn't complicated either, i just had to show them that i am not some asshole from the West. I think they bought it.  since I had a great time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2025 by Xerxes

[Xerxes]

Thanks LC, every time i hear south of Italy, it takes me to this movie

 

 

[cwericb]

9 hours ago, Xerxes said:

 

This would be a 1,000 pages long PhD thesis looking all the different permutations, beyond my puny mind. I have no idea if you would have been more or less successful in a what if scenario. 

 

U.S. chose to lead and stand-up for the Western civilization in the 1940s. But it was not all charity, Marshall Plan may have been seem like charity, but I promise you it was done as an investment with an eye on the Soviet Union and how easy a war ravaged Europe would succumb for the communism. If there was not Soviet Union, Europe would have had no Marshall Plan. 

 

Everything since than, it has been to reinforce its global hegemony, through wars, coup d'etat, interventions, military or economically etc. I hope I am not breaking news here. Whoever voted the neoconservatives to power 20 years ago, are probably the same people that are now donning the MAGA hats. They had their fun and a go at gunboat diplomacy and nation building, now they are having a go at being isolationist. 

 

U.S. presidents were elected by the American people. Their decision represents the will of the people. Right or wrong. As an example, it is not Canada' fault that U.S. had to go off the gold standard, because Vietnam was costing too much. Who elected your presidents then and what was their policy vis a vis the dreaded RED threat. Were those policy and views vis a vis communism overblown. Seem like it. Just a decade later, a new approach was made.

 

You collectively voted in those leaders, and lived under that umbrella, thumb your chests for them, and your corporations benefitted immensely because of it as new markets opened up. Not too mention that flow of oil that fueled the growth of your economy, even as you militarized the region. .... and we don't want to even talk about the mess in the middle east either.

 

So own up to your own past, the things you have done, ... before demanding to annex your allies and wipe out their identity, through economic subjugation, as sort of a weird bizzarro payment, because it costs to much to maintain the empire, and you don't feel like doing it anymore. ... and then having the audacity to threaten more retaliation, because Canada is not rolling over fast enough.

 

 

 

 

If U.S. wants to abdicate its global leadership role. So be it.

People have demanded change. Make it happen.

 

And I (and anybody else) have no problems with U.S. discussing legitimate and unfair trade practices. But we all know there is more to it than that. The Trump Administration is seeking a casus belli.

 

 

 

 

 

I was in India for three weeks, right after fresh off the Canadian-Indian spats.

 

All the Indian tour guides I met, looked at me in a funny way, ask me about Trudeau by name. Some of them even asked me, "if Canadians don't like Indians"; i had no idea where that came from. In my book that shit is between government not people;

 

But it wasn't complicated either, i just had to show them that i am not some asshole from the West. I think they bought it.  since I had a great time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very well said Xerxes!

 

[Spekulatius]

The US spend 3.8% of GDP on defense. Take out welfare program in the defense budget (~$100B veterans care, support for military families) and its ~3.5% give or take.

 

Thats more than most other NATO members. However, what percentage of the US military is actually associated with NATO the North Atlantic theater?

 

Total US troops in Europe are ~65k. The US has ~50k soldiers stationed in Japan and more than 25k are in South Korea. Those are not NATO theater. The Pacific fleet? Nope. National Guard? Nope.

 

So maybe 2-2.5% of the US spending is really around NATO , the rest is associated with other goals. The NATO mission statement is solely aligned North Atlantic defense only.

 

To really drop the defense expenses, the US needs to drop their far reaching goals like winning an extended conflict anywhere in the world against anyone. Thats not a NATO mission statement and no other Nation within  NATO has any far reaching goals besides defending their border other than maybe the UK.  Needless to say that’s why Europeans have spent less on defense.

 

Now that’s  changing because they have barbarians at the border (Russians) that even worse the US has aligned themselves with. So it clear that the US is not aligned with Europe in terms of defense any more and NATO in the context of a Russian thread is worthless which likely lead to an European defense alliance ex USA.

 

This also means that Europe will need to obtain its own nukes.

Edited March 13, 2025 by Spekulatius

[Sweet]

BBC reporting:

 

In comments to Russian media this morning, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov outlines Russia's position on the 30-day ceasefire proposal.

In a nutshell, Ushakov rejects it, saying it would amount to nothing more than a temporary respite for the Ukrainian military and a chance for it to regroup.

He also says that Russia is seeking a "long-term peace settlement in Ukraine that takes into account Moscow's interests and concerns", and adds that a "normal exchange of opinions" between Russia and the US is "taking place in a calm manner".

Ushakov also says the US understands that Ukraine's membership of Nato is out of the question.

 

 

[SharperDingaan]

Time is ticking on musk, and it isn't going well. The man has lost it, and same as a druggie .... is now addicted. No matter how rich you are, your pusher controls you .... along with the president you bought. 

 

Starlink, Tesla, Space Ex; target them and the druggie craters. Maybe he makes it to rehab .... maybe he falls off the balcony that his Russian friends are so fond of.

 

SD

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2025 by SharperDingaan

[lnofeisone]

And more fired probationary employees must now be reinstated...with back pay. Add that to the pile of waste and abuse. Add in a Trump/Musk-appointed influencer posing from a government office during work hours, and you now have fraud. A trifecta that describes the current administration.

 

https://nypost.com/2025/03/12/us-news/trump-official-mclaurine-pinover-posted-fashion-influencer-videos-from-her-opm-office/

 

I wonder if she wrote this as part of her 5 bullets.

[Spekulatius]

15 minutes ago, SharperDingaan said:

Time is ticking on musk, and it isn't going well. The man has lost it, and same as a druggie .... is now addicted. No matter how rich you are, your pusher controls you .... along with the president you bought. 

 

Starlink, Tesla, Space Ex; target them and the druggie craters. Maybe he makes it to rehab .... maybe he falls off the balcony that his Russian friends are so fond of.

 

SD

 

 

 

 

 

He also looks terrible. Wouldn’t be a surprise to me if he didn’t make it to age 60.

[John Hjorth]

49 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

He also looks terrible. Wouldn’t be a surprise to me if he didn’t make it to age 60.

 

@Spekulatius,

 

Yes, he looks like something dragged into the house by the cat. Likely stressed, likely because of the pressure he feels from various head winds in his sphere, perhaps he is sleep deprived, too.

[rogermunibond]