Politics

[Red Leg]

And if memory serves, the Ukrainians have been fighting internally for quite some time with the eastern part of the country pro-Russia and the central and western parts pro-West/NATO. Russia is not going to have any tolerance of Ukraine being part of NATO and after the last power shift in Ukraine that was what was being pushed for, NATO membership. Not excusing Russia one bit in all of this, they are definitely the aggressor, but the last group that got a hold of power in Ukraine was definitely poking the bear, and the bear threw a punch because the US an EU had feckless leadership, and the bear knew it. The Ukrainian leadership made a bad choice on that front. People are being myopic a bit, IMHO, as they don't look at who they are dealing with in Putin, he's an old Soviet Union KGB guy and that's the prism he views the world from. Ukraine in NATO is a 100% red line in the sand for him. Putin miscalculated though thinking the Ukraine was going to be a pushover, cost him 800,000 men. It's also put him in a bind at home on a number of fronts. I personally think Putin wants out of this mess but it seems like the Ukrainians keep asking for more "aid" to continue the fight. Don't think they were anticipating the response they got from the US this last go around. Hopefully this thing comes to an end soon.

What was Ukraine supposed to do? They were an independent country where a larger, more powerful neighbor was fomenting a civil war within its boundaries. By the way, its predecessor, the Soviet Union, destabilized governments in a similar way across the world during the Cold War. The US and Great Britain had made it clear that they would not honor the implied commitments of the 1994 memorandum. Therefore, like almost every other Eastern European nation, it seized upon NATO and EU membership as its only possible security guarantee.

Seeking such security guarantees hardly excuses Putin's brutal invasion, an invasion, by the way, that has added nearly a thousand miles of NATO border to Russia in hiking distance of St. Petersburg (Finland) and turned the Baltic into a NATO lake (Sweden and Finland). Strategic brilliance on Putin's part.

Of course Ukraine is continuing to fight - just as I pray we would were the PRC to occupy 20% of our country on the West Coast. Every Russian they kill puts additional pressure on Putin to make concessions in any negotiation - at least it did until Trump seems to suddenly support Russia and its aims.

No nation will want to provide a bilateral agreement to defend Ukraine against renewed aggression. The simplest way to provide them with a collective security arrangement is simply gran them NATO membership.

 

[Red Leg]

You typically provide a very fair assessment. This one is no different but I think we're not on the same point.

The point I'm making is not whether it's a proxy war. It's that the narrative of "it's all Putin's fault" and the "unprovoked" bits are not accurate.

And if we're all in agreement that we've (The USA) been in a proxy war, then the unprovoked and unilateral aggression by Putin argument clearly falls down.

That is nonsensical. Events start wars - proxy or otherwise. In this case, Russia threatened and then invaded Ukraine. We went to Ukraine's assistance following that invasion. That created a military conflict, however indirectly between ourselves in the Kremlin. I think it is one which we and our ally should win. A favorable negotiated settlement would be a great goal.

 

[Datchew]

That is nonsensical. Events start wars - proxy or otherwise. In this case, Russia threatened and then invaded Ukraine. We went to Ukraine's assistance following that invasion. That created a military conflict, however indirectly between ourselves in the Kremlin. I think it is one which we and our ally should win. A favorable negotiated settlement would be a great goal.

I see this as snapping the chalkline on the timeline where it's convenient for the preferred narrative. In this case, you're snapping it at "Russia threatened and then invaded Ukraine."

It's perfectly sensible to realize that it's not that simple if you're willing to view it with less built in bias or without a preconceived narrative.

I call balls and strikes. It doesn't mean I'm un-American or a Putin supporter.

I respect your experience and the insight gained therein but I'm going to leave it in the "we view it differently" category.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

@Tubby’s Canteen , I thought you might be interested in this.. I know USMCA is a topic that is a pretty big hot button for you..

It appears MX gets a 1 month reprieve from tariffs that are covered under USMCA..

Maybe something similar is being negotiated with CA.. but I haven't seen it yet..

My guess (admittedly a complete and total guess) is Doug Ford, Trudeau, and others response has been very different than Mexico's response.. and as a result, Trump is very purposefully going to follow through with his threats.. and likely go further with them in fairly short order if Canada doesn't change its tactics soon..

Mexico played the "what did we fail to do??? everything you asked for, we gave you.. we sent cartel bosses to the US to be prosecuted.. we sent 10K marines to the border to help seal it.. etc..etc.. what else is it you want?????" card.. followed by "if we have to, we will respond with additional tariffs of our own" (a fairly low key, veiled threat.. while also posturing as a victim)...

Senior CA officials have responded very differently with tough guy commentary and pretty hollow threats that are honestly pretty meaningless to anyone paying attention... Trudeau keeps pointing toward what HE thinks are successful metrics (Trump clearly disagrees on what the measurement of "success" is) but doesn't really respond by saying what actions have been taken (where the Mexicans are much more action focused.. ie you asked for X.. we gave you X.. you asked for Y.. we gave you Y..)..

For example Fords announcement yesterday that he was going to kill all Ontario govt spending on US provided services was pure comedy if anyone understands that the Ontario govt isn't actually buying "US Based services" as Ford describes... an example would be General Dynamics Land Systems Canada is a company that sells services to Canada... it is owned by GDLS (USA).. but it employs thousands of Canadians, is a Canadian business, etc (and is the 3rd largest provider of services to the Canadian government).. but it is NOT a US based company (the profits simply flow back to the US)...

So is Fords plan to kill thousands of Canadian jobs by shutting off GDLS-C? or does he plan on shutting off GDLS (the US entity)? which does no business with the Canadian government anyway?

The same is true of all of the US owned (but Canada based) firms that supply the Canadian Govt with goods and services that are on Canada's top 20 list of providers, without exception..

What Ford fails to understand (clearly) is that Canada does the same thing with the US..

CAE is a $4.1B Canadian firm... the overwhelming majority of that company's revenue comes from the services and products it sells to the US government (aircraft flight simulators for the USAF for example is one of CAE's biggest contracts)..

So what happens when the US responds to Fords threats in kind and prohibits any Canadian firm from doing business with the US Govt? Who actually feels more pain? and who feels it most quickly? Boeing is CAE's primary competitor on the Aircraft Simulator front.. and could step into the void (and would love to) immediately.. Whereas to my knowledge Canada doesn't have a Canadian replacement for GDLS-C available.. their only option would to be to hire a European competitor at a higher price while simultaneously shutting down a large business that employs a ton of Canadians (thereby harming the Canadian economy)..



View attachment 669745

As Ive said in other posts.. Im not advocating Trumps methodology at all... I personally think a more measured approach with a less erratic tempo would be a better way to approach the issue..

Im simply pointing out the facts... Mexico seems to be tempering things fairly well at the moment with their strategy.. while Canada appears to continue losing ground with its strategy..

I agree with a lot of the points your making. I would note that Mexico is not in the run up to a federal election. A lot of the response from the liberal party is election fodder. I received a text message from the Conservative Party yesterday sighting an article that an election will likely be called march 16th.

Like wise Doug ford just called a snap election and won a strong mandate campaigning on defiance of trump it wouldn’t do for him to appear to roll over now would it.

Mexico had legitimate grounds to work on. More fentanyl has been confiscated in a single day at the Mexican boarder than for the entire last year in Canada.

Canadian statistic

Mexican statistic

 

[Brent in Az]

Last warning.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

It wasn't "when he realized the issues with the trade agreement..."

Normally, the legislature is responsible for tariffs (Article 1, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States", also "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."). However, there is a law (The Trade Expansion Act of 1962) which allows the President to establish tariffs in support of national security. National security is also specifically listed in USMCA as a reason for abridging portions of the agreement. So it would be more correct to say that it became a "security issue" because that is within his purview, as opposed to just declaring it without a national security background.

Please note: the above should not be construed as necessarily agreeing with the decision, it merely points out the facts in the discussion.

That said, if Trump's actions are digging in to Canadian perceptions of their own internal politics, then information operations in Canada are much more effective than they were when I was a student at the Canadian Forces College.

The tariffs when first announced were to due to trade deficit, only once it became clear that a trade deficit was not a legitimate reason was security mentioned. I find it hard to fathom anyone believes the tariffs imposed on Canada have anything to do with security. Personally I find it hard to believe trump cares about drug users at all I’m surprised he hasn’t defunded Narcan and let the problem sort it’s self out seems like it would be much more in line with his modus operandi.

 

[HookMeUpII]

Last warning.

View attachment 669768

Looks like he/we decided to cut out the middle-man:

Secret US talks with Hamas are ‘positive’ after Trump’s warning — but came as shock to Israel

America’s secret talks with Hamas are moving along in a “positive” direction after President Trump warned the terror group to release the hostages in Gaza “or there will be …

nypost.com

 

[mdwest]

I agree with a lot of the points your making. I would note that Mexico is not in the run up to a federal election. A lot of the response from the liberal party is election fodder. I received a text message from the Conservative Party yesterday sighting an article that an election will likely be called march 16th. View attachment 669763
Like wise Doug ford just called a snap election and won a strong mandate campaigning on defiance of trump it wouldn’t do for him to appear to roll over now would it.

Mexico had legitimate grounds to work on. More fentanyl has been confiscated in a single day at the Mexican boarder than for the entire last year in Canada.

Canadian statistic View attachment 669764

Mexican statisticView attachment 669766

Completely concur...

Similar problem for MX and CA.. but very different circumstances are involved..

Its a sad reality that politics are more about politicians getting re-elected and staying in power than doing whats is right by their country and its citizens.. I unfortunately think that's the same all over the globe.. doesn't matter if we're talking about Putin, Trump, Macron, Starmer, Xi, or lower level players like Ford or Warren or Schumer..

The same game, just being played with different strategies and tactics...

Most of the time Im convinced politicians, whether "good" or "bad" don't really know what they are talking about or the real effects of the actions they take.. and most of the constituents they are supposed to represent don't really know or understand the actions necessary to be followed to obtain the things they want from their government...

Bread and Circuses only works when the population prefers ignorance over reality.. and is willing to settle for their wants as opposed to having their needs addressed..

 

[Fastrig]

What was Ukraine supposed to do? They were an independent country where a larger, more powerful neighbor was fomenting a civil war within its boundaries. By the way, its predecessor, the Soviet Union, destabilized governments in a similar way across the world during the Cold War. The US and Great Britain had made it clear that they would not honor the implied commitments of the 1994 memorandum. Therefore, like almost every other Eastern European nation, it seized upon NATO and EU membership as its only possible security guarantee.

Seeking such security guarantees hardly excuses Putin's brutal invasion, an invasion, by the way, that has added nearly a thousand miles of NATO border to Russia in hiking distance of St. Petersburg (Finland) and turned the Baltic into a NATO lake (Sweden and Finland). Strategic brilliance on Putin's part.

Of course Ukraine is continuing to fight - just as I pray we would were the PRC to occupy 20% of our country on the West Coast. Every Russian they kill puts additional pressure on Putin to make concessions in any negotiation - at least it did until Trump seems to suddenly support Russia and its aims.

No nation will want to provide a bilateral agreement to defend Ukraine against renewed aggression. The simplest way to provide them with a collective security arrangement is simply gran them NATO membership.

I wasn't, and am not, making a blame judgement in any way, shape or form. I merely pointed out that, while Russia is clearly the aggressor, that the Ukrainian's are internally divided in pro-Russia and pro-West sections of the country, have been fighting one another over it for quite some time, and that the most recent pro-west faction that took over made some bad calls by misreading Putin and poking the bear. I don't have any problem with Ukraine fighting back, and Putin grossly under estimated the Ukrainians and, frankly, got his ass handed to him, so to speak. I'm also pointing out that Putin wants out of this mess, of his own making, but isn't going to back out and look weak at home. That's not the way the Russians operate, it's all about saving face with them. The Ukrainians need to understand this and deal with the cards they have. I'm also pointing out that we, the US, can no longer afford to keep funding other country's battles, security, etc. We Are Broke!! If the EU is so concerned about Russia in Their backyard, let them fund the Ukraine defense, and their own for that matter. Take NATO off the table, strike a mineral deal with Ukraine where we have vested interests there, then tell Putin we are doing business here, these are the map lines, here's a peace deal to sign, etc. He can then go home a brag he stopped NATO "aggression" and "expansion" to protect the homeland, or whatever other propaganda he wants. Give him an out where he doesn't lose face, he'll take it and the shooting can stop. You leave NATO membership on the table and this isn't going to end, it might even escalate.

 

[Tanks]

You typically provide a very fair assessment. This one is no different but I think we're not on the same point.

The point I'm making is not whether it's a proxy war. It's that the narrative of "it's all Putin's fault" and the "unprovoked" bits are not accurate.

And if we're all in agreement that we've (The USA) been in a proxy war, then the unprovoked and unilateral aggression by Putin argument clearly falls down.

It became a proxy war once Putin invaded. If he had not invaded there would have been no war, proxy or otherwise.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Completely concur...

Similar problem for MX and CA.. but very different circumstances are involved..

Its a sad reality that politics are more about politicians getting re-elected and staying in power than doing whats is right by their country and its citizens.. I unfortunately think that's the same all over the globe.. doesn't matter if we're talking about Putin, Trump, Macron, Starmer, Xi, or lower level players like Ford or Warren or Schumer..

The same game, just being played with different strategies and tactics...

Most of the time Im convinced politicians, whether "good" or "bad" don't really know what they are talking about or the real effects of the actions they take.. and most of the constituents they are supposed to represent don't really know or understand the actions necessary to be followed to obtain the things they want from their government...

Bread and Circuses only works when the population prefers ignorance over reality.. and is willing to settle for their wants as opposed to having their needs addressed..

I read an article once and I can’t seem to find it to quote it. The just of it was the idea of a one term/5 year limit on federal and provincial government representatives. The idea being that if you only had one shot at your time in politics you less likely to blindly vote the party platform and more likely vote morally knowing in a fixed amount of time you’d be back among your constituents daily and have to answer for your shortcomings or successes. The article also proposed doing away with political pension plans and instead matching what ever the individual would of contributed to their pension in their prior field of employment. I’m not necessarily advocating that as the answer but it does raise some interesting points.

 

[Tanks]

He can then go home a brag he stopped NATO "aggression" and "expansion" to protect the homeland, or whatever other propaganda he wants. Give him an out where he doesn't lose face, he'll take it and the shooting can stop. You leave NATO membership on the table and this isn't going to end, it might even escalate.

NATO expansion can't be an excuse anymore since Putin basically forced Scandinavian countries to join NATO. Russia shares a much larger border with NATO countries now than it did prior to start of war.
NATO membership is a way Ukraine can be safe in the future.

 

[Fastrig]

NATO expansion can't be an excuse anymore since Putin basically forced Scandinavian countries to join NATO. Russia shares a much larger border with NATO countries now than it did prior to start of war.
NATO membership is a way Ukraine can be safe in the future.

Not disagreeing with you, but what you aren't taking into account is Putin, his world perspective, and Russian politics. Putin isn't going to back down on Ukraine being a NATO member as the result of this, he's just not. He will lose his grip on Russia if he does by looking weak in the face of an unpopular war at home. He will double down if NATO admits Ukraine as a member right now, and we end up with an even bigger mess at that point. I think that was what Trump was referring to the other day in the WH, i.e. risking WWIII to Zelensky. I think Trump understands that there needs to be a "way out" for Putin, he's looking for one, but think he was getting push back from Zelensky on it, then the crap hit the wall. Just my take on it.

 

[rigbymauser]

Of course Ukraine is continuing to fight - just as I pray we would were the PRC to occupy 20% of our country on the West Coast. Every Russian they kill puts additional pressure on Putin to make concessions in any negotiation - at least it did until Trump seems to suddenly support Russia and its aims.

Trump came as heaven sent to Putin. Trump ought to recieve The order of Saint George. No american president have yet been nominated for this honorable medal.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Trump came as heaven sent to Putin. Trump ought to recieve The order of Saint George. No american president have yet been nominated for this honorable medal.

Hero of the federation

 

[Wheels]

This is pretty hilarious. Perkins Coie looses all security clearances. This will cost them millions of dollars. This is the second significant law firm this has happened to in the past month. Perhaps big law will have second thoughts regarding pursuing lawfare. The fact Derringer is dropping his case against the Trump Administration probably is evidence none of them wanted to test Trump by taking up a pro bono case for Derringer. Doubt this would have happened eight years ago.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1897742723337363831

 

[Brent in Az]

Looks like he/we decided to cut out the middle-man:

Secret US talks with Hamas are ‘positive’ after Trump’s warning — but came as shock to Israel

America’s secret talks with Hamas are moving along in a “positive” direction after President Trump warned the terror group to release the hostages in Gaza “or there will be …

nypost.com

If that's true, its no longer a secret.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

If that's true, its no longer a secret.

That’s not strictly true those tribes of the northern tip of India are most likely still in the dark same as the ones in the rainforest. I don’t know what strategic value keeping them in the dark is though.

 

[Brent in Az]

I'm sure those tribes, neither care, or have TDS.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

I'm sure those tribes, neither care, or have TDS.

Your right of coarse I’m sure given there closeness with the nature they live in they also use red hats the way nature intended to mark a pile of bovine fecal matter.

If we’re going to continue to trade barbs do try to keep up a battle of wits is much more enjoyable when both combatants are armed.