The Donald Trump thread

[Mark B]

Agree on WWII. Hitler could not be stopped. He had absolute power and was absolutely barking. And appeasement by us would have only bought a little time; and the UK would have ended up even worse off than we did.

Disagree on Iran. What Americans did they kill? Recent? Enough to go to war today? Israelis, perhaps, but that is their war.

Iran was heavily involved in Iraq in providing IEDs. But "recency" will be adjudicated by individuals, to you that is likely not recent but to me it would be.

Iranian support to the Houthis has also been an issue for global shipping. Hamas and Hezbollah are also part of that. The US wants out of the Middle East militarily and neutering Iran is part of that.

 

[Attilio1905]

I'm curious how you would have de-escalated WW2. I've spent a fair amount of time brain storming this with academics and I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it.

Iran is a regional problem and has been since 1979. Them killing and supporting the killing of Israelis and Americans are both a cause to go to war. Human beings don't actually go to war for human rights because the people who declare that they care about them prefer virtue signaling over actually doing anything. The same crowd also isn't doing anything real about climate change either but they still want to rant about it.

Speaking of Jags, their ability to obliterate their brand might be the only thing surpassing Trump's self inflicted wounds.

The academics you've been brainstorming with can't have been much cop if my simple post has managed to pique your curiosity. It wasnt Jason Arday, was it?

I'll tell you what, let me have my dinner and then i'll come back to you. I am flattered you wish to hear my thoughts but an intellectual such as your self deserves a considered and well thought out reply.

Bereitstehen, Mark.

 

[Mark B]

The academics you've been brainstorming with can't have been much cop if my simple post has managed to pique your curiosity. It wasnt Jason Arday, was it?

I'll tell you what, let me have my dinner and then i'll come back to you. I am flattered you wish to hear my thoughts but an intellectual such as your self deserves a considered and well thought out reply.

Bereitstehen, Mark.

These have been primarily historians as well as a mix of military practitioners / theorists. Unfortunately, I'm not on Jason's Christmas card list.

I've spent a long time planning and what I've determined is that I loved having non "experts" involved because they view the world differently then experts who mainly think similarly because of their experience and education. The layman doesn't know that something is "impossible" so they haven't shut their mind off to alternate possibilities. So lay it on me, I'll happily share my thoughts on the feasibility of your idea and expand on how it could have been both possible and impossible. .

 

[PalazioVecchio]

That is unnecessarily rude, especially given we have had convivial interactions up to now and I find a lot of what you post interesting

i apologise. My nurse had my scrotum jammed between the wooden slats of a garden chair. It made me temporarily grumpy.

anyhoo..........

Donald Trump. He is better than a Hollywood movie. Pure entertainment.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

The US wants out of the Middle East militarily

easier said than done. Oil is Oil. Its like wanting out of a sh1.tty marriage with a fit bird who goes like the clappers.

 

[Mark B]

easier said than done. Oil is Oil. Its like wanting out of a sh1.tty marriage with a fit bird who goes like the clappers.

I would agree, it is delusional at best that "if only Iran was solved" is going to solve a crisis area that has been conflict filled for about the last 6,000 years. Even when the oil eventually runs out, it will still be a maritime traffic area that requires security.

But once the oil issue and the transportation issues are magically solved through Star Trek level transporter beams, we are totally out of that region.

So basically any day now.

 

[eaglesdare]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2118043647132201374

 

[kevlee]

JD Vance is 100% correct. As someone who holds shares in Shell and BP and has an EV, Trump has made me quite a bit of money.
To my cousin in Michigan who is paying $4.50 a gallon he isn’t popular, especially after slagging off the Pope as well.
Being Israel’s bitch as been Trumps undoing. He must realise that.
Vance is the future for the Republicans.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

JD Vance is 100% correct. As someone who holds shares in Shell and BP and has an EV, Trump has made me quite a bit of money.
To my cousin in Michigan who is paying $4.50 a gallon he isn’t popular, especially after slagging off the Pope as well.
Being Israel’s bitch as been Trumps undoing. He must realise that.
Vance is the future for the Republicans.

The Republicans must replace Trump with Vance very soon. Otherwise they are doomed. But it is quite a difficult and risky process to impeach a President. They usually must be mad, half-dead, or otherwise lost the plot.

Trump's Trainwreck has been inflation. Inflation driven from the Iran War.

 

[Glazier#1]

Ha ha ha!

All you people endlessly repeating the slogan TDS to denigrate any criticism of the orange egomaniac have now come to realise - after all this time - that Trump Derangement Syndrome was, all this time, just describing his symptoms/illness.

Has the penny dropped yet?

Now all his 'supporters' are dropping him like he's a lump of doggipoo.

What about all those on here who were blowing his Trumpet when he was elected?

Oh dear....

It's gone deafeningly quiet.

No words of contrition?

Haha!

 

[silvertop]

Iran was heavily involved in Iraq in providing IEDs. But "recency" will be adjudicated by individuals, to you that is likely not recent but to me it would be.

Iranian support to the Houthis has also been an issue for global shipping. Hamas and Hezbollah are also part of that. The US wants out of the Middle East militarily and neutering Iran is part of that.

Yes, we know they're c***s. But they are also very hard to dislodge.

They have a massive, fanatical army that is fairly well equipped and with some experience. And it is their country. Vietnam?

They have also created a regime that is effectively revolution proof. So even the locals can't shift them.

They are like Russia, North Korea and China. You have ways of containing them. And I won't lose a wink over bombing and otherwise addressing their nuclear facilities. But you don't go to war against them.

 

[silvertop]

JD Vance is 100% correct. As someone who holds shares in Shell and BP and has an EV, Trump has made me quite a bit of money.
To my cousin in Michigan who is paying $4.50 a gallon he isn’t popular, especially after slagging off the Pope as well.
Being Israel’s bitch as been Trumps undoing. He must realise that.
Vance is the future for the Republicans.

Probably not. He is too bonded to Trump. His chance as successor will dim even further over the next 2 years as Trump flaps about and presents as increasingly erratic and child like.

He is trying to detach himself as best he can, but it seems the die is cast no matter how hard he tries to wash himself clean of Trump.

 

[eaglesdare]

Let's hope Kamala Harris and tampon tim take the results as a sign to run again 😎

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Probably not. He is too bonded to Trump. His chance as successor will dim even further over the next 2 years as Trump flaps about and presents as increasingly erratic and child like.
He is trying to detach himself as best he can, but it seems the die is cast no matter how hard he tries to wash himself clean of Trump.

it is possible to detach from a monster predecessor. Charles II did it - his dad was hated. Many have done it. After Stalin, Nikita Kruschev did it.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Yes, we know they're c***s. But they are also very hard to dislodge.

They have a massive, fanatical army that is fairly well equipped and with some experience. And it is their country. Vietnam?

They have also created a regime that is effectively revolution proof. So even the locals can't shift them.

They are like Russia, North Korea and China. You have ways of containing them. And I won't lose a wink over bombing and otherwise addressing their nuclear facilities. But you don't go to war against them.

I've mentioned before that I spent a short time in Iran in the early 80s, when they were at war with Iraq, and it was a scary place but what was notable was that the culture was very much imposed on the locals, particularly in Tehran where people who were willing to speak (often young people who'd been at university in Britain and been brought back by their families and were unable to leave again but some older people too) were bewildered by what had happened to the country since 1979 and often criticised/blamed those they called country people who they thought of as uneducated and gullible. Of course during the past 40+ years those who've grown up under that kind of repression and not known any other life are probably far more indoctrinated.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Sorry but thats bollocks.
We are in no danger from Iran at all, it's the enemies at home we need to worry out.

We need to just leave the sand people too it, let them go all jihaddy and blow each other up in their own lands and just focus on protecting the intereests of our people.

And yes, people are primarily motivated by self interest .

That is a contradictory statement.

 

[Glazier#1]

Hey Spidermen!

Here's what you wrote in US Politics only on Saturday:

"Wasting your breath, Mark. He is a founder member of the TDS Club 😂

For you, I repeat my post of earlier and look forward to your reply:

Ha ha ha!

All you people endlessly repeating the slogan TDS to denigrate any criticism of the orange egomaniac have now come to realise - after all this time - that Trump Derangement Syndrome was, all this time, just describing his symptoms/illness.

Has the penny dropped yet?

Now all his 'supporters' are dropping him like he's a lump of doggipoo.

What about all those on here who were blowing his Trumpet when he was elected?

Oh dear....

It's gone deafeningly quiet.

No words of contrition?

Haha!

 

[Mark B]

Yes, we know they're c***s. But they are also very hard to dislodge.

They have a massive, fanatical army that is fairly well equipped and with some experience. And it is their country. Vietnam?

They have also created a regime that is effectively revolution proof. So even the locals can't shift them.

They are like Russia, North Korea and China. You have ways of containing them. And I won't lose a wink over bombing and otherwise addressing their nuclear facilities. But you don't go to war against them.

That is the rub, they just aren't going to quit and the IRGC doesn't actually care about anyone but themselves so they'll let the entire country burn to the ground as long as they stay in power.

Both of their armies (Regular and IRGC) are trash and would be slaughtered during ground combat operations against the US. Even the Iranians understand this which is why they would sacrifice their ground force in order to buy time for their Basij (the IRGC militia to rise) and the Quds (their actual Special Operations guys) to go to ground. So taking the country takes about a month, and then trying to get rid of the Basij/Quds would take years. The real hardest part is finding someone legit to take it afterwards that the people would support. The Shah's son thinks its him, I'm not so sure.

The have a decentralized structure that is designed to to withstand gaps (i.e. deaths). The cost to that is that the people at the top don't know what the people at the bottom are doing because they don't always have direct communication. That is why the top Iranian elected leadership is often surprised when the IRGC shoots at tankers, no one tells them what they are doing.

Actual authoritarian regimes are serious in how they deal with people. People in the West like to call people like Trump an authoritarian but they have no clue what they are actually talking about. In serious places you are executed and your family put in jail when you step out of line. And then your Auntie is rewarded for turning you in.

I would agree, there were better ways to take care of this. I have a theory that Trump did not go into this willingly and that Bibi forced his hand on this adventure.

 

[silvertop]

That is the rub, they just aren't going to quit and the IRGC doesn't actually care about anyone but themselves so they'll let the entire country burn to the ground as long as they stay in power.

Both of their armies (Regular and IRGC) are trash and would be slaughtered during ground combat operations against the US. Even the Iranians understand this which is why they would sacrifice their ground force in order to buy time for their Basij (the IRGC militia to rise) and the Quds (their actual Special Operations guys) to go to ground. So taking the country takes about a month, and then trying to get rid of the Basij/Quds would take years. The real hardest part is finding someone legit to take it afterwards that the people would support. The Shah's son thinks its him, I'm not so sure.

The have a decentralized structure that is designed to to withstand gaps (i.e. deaths). The cost to that is that the people at the top don't know what the people at the bottom are doing because they don't always have direct communication. That is why the top Iranian elected leadership is often surprised when the IRGC shoots at tankers, no one tells them what they are doing.

Actual authoritarian regimes are serious in how they deal with people. People in the West like to call people like Trump an authoritarian but they have no clue what they are actually talking about. In serious places you are executed and your family put in jail when you step out of line. And then your Auntie is rewarded for turning you in.

I would agree, there were better ways to take care of this. I have a theory that Trump did not go into this willingly and that Bibi forced his hand on this adventure.

Think you may be right, but will we ever know?

 

[silvertop]

it is possible to detach from a monster predecessor. Charles II did it - his dad was hated. Many have done it. After Stalin, Nikita Kruschev did it.

Not great examples.

One was in an authoritarian regime where the successor was selected by a core, unelected group and then announced as fait accompli to the proles.

The other had, between reigns, a deeply unpopular, puritan autocracy that e.g. banned Christmas.

Vance is expected to immediately follow in a state where the leader is selected by popular vote. In the USA we have Johnson and Ford as recent examples. LBJ succeeded JFK (they love their acronyms) and could hardly lose given Kennedy's popularity and the way he left office. Ford followed a deposed criminal and was beaten by a peanut farmer.

I suspect the latter is a more apposite comparison.