US Politics

[Wisbech Eagle]

RFK just delivered exactly what he promised and that is aligning the US core schedule with global best practices, focusing on the vital ones while restoring trust.

Maybe you can have a word with the EU then if you don't like their vaccine recommendations... recommendations which RFK has just aligned with.

You are seriously confused. There isn’t an EU policy on vaccines. It’s up to each national government to decide what is best for their population in their circumstances.

Unlike the UK, where vaccination is NOT mandatory it is for some vaccines in some EU countries. Here parents, whilst strongly advised and encouraged to have their children vaccinated, can refuse.

As the US also mandates some vaccines it could be argued they are therefore more aligned with the EU than us. Not though in a way I think you will approve of!

 

[eaglesdare]

You are seriously confused. There isn’t an EU policy on vaccines. It’s up to each national government to decide what is best for their population in their circumstances.

Unlike the UK, where vaccination is NOT mandatory it is for some vaccines in some EU countries. Here parents, whilst strongly advised and encouraged to have their children vaccinated, can refuse.

As the US also mandates some vaccines it could be argued they are therefore more aligned with the EU than us. Not though in a way I think you will approve of!

Exactly there's no single "EU policy"; each member state sets its own schedule based on national evidence and circumstances. The US are just coming in line with that. So what's your problem 🤷‍♂️

Most European countries recommend far fewer than the old US schedule, without mandates for many. RFK delivered evidence based reform 👍

End of the day I don't really care. I've never had a vaccine 🤣

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

This doesn’t just apply to US politics as it explores the consequences of what the USA has just done in a wide ranging analysis. Please suspend your anticipated aversion to the presenters, Rory Stewart and Alistair Campbell. It’s worth listening too and opens up many possibilities:-

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Exactly there's no single "EU policy"; each member state sets its own schedule based on national evidence and circumstances. The US are just coming in line with that. So what's your problem 🤷‍♂️

Most European countries recommend far fewer than the old US schedule, without mandates for many. RFK delivered evidence based reform 👍

End of the day I don't really care. I've never had a vaccine 🤣

Total bs!

The evidence is that vaccines save many more lives than ever they harm, let alone take.

Anyone who subscribes to the conspiracy theories spread about them ought not be in charge of children’s toilets. Let alone their health policies.

 

[eaglesdare]

Total bs!

The evidence is that vaccines save many more lives than ever they harm, let alone take.

Anyone who subscribes to the conspiracy theories spread about them ought not be in charge of children’s toilets. Let alone their health policies.

RFK delivered exactly what he promised which was to align with international consensus on core vaccines, rebuild trust and empower parents to make decisions.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I have listened several times to Sachs on his analysis of the buildup to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and his criticism of NATO. I respect him for that and acknowledge that he knows a great deal more about it than I do. That’s where it ends though. From the moment of the invasion until now I don’t see any difference in his analysis to mine.

Responsibly for the war is mostly at the feet of the US State department under previous administrations. Sachs makes this very clear and he was involved with the Ukrainian government for years in the 2000s and knows more than most.

I've spent, literally years arguing his points on the responsibility for the war and you did nothing but deny and argue against all of them. I'd always said that Russia had responsibility for the 2022 invasion, we weren't arguing over that.

Now you come out with this? Lord give me strength, you are the giddy limit.

He isn’t any more “anti-Trump” than I am. He is against many of the things that the Trump regime is doing, and sees enormous danger in the direction it is taking. Getting Trump out of power will never be enough! The whole damn bunch need to be democratically rejected and their paymasters scrutinised and prosecuted if corruption is found. I no more believe that the end justifies the means than I believe in Father Christmas. That’s Trumpian logic. I believe in the law. For everyone. Internationally too. So does Jeffrey Sachs.

He was also against many of the things the Biden administration was doing as well.....something for which we hardly had a peep out of you on....In fact you defended pretty much all of their social policies. Sachs is a liberal but not a loon.

Your first two sentences would be fair on Sachs with Trump. What comes after that wouldn't.

Your denial that you don't believe the ends justify the means is wholly dishonest or self delusional. What you wrote on here about the Trump attempted assassination and Covid demonstrate that you have zero principles applied to your enemies....Unlike Sachs.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Responsibly for the war is mostly at the feet of the US State department under previous administrations. Sachs makes this very clear and he was involved with the Ukrainian government for years in the 2000s and knows more than most.

I've spent, literally years arguing his points on the responsibility for the war and you did nothing but deny and argue against all of them. I'd always said that Russia had responsibility for the 2022 invasion, we weren't arguing over that.

Now you come out with this? Lord give me strength, you are the giddy limit.




He was also against many of the things the Biden administration was doing as well.....something for which we hardly had a peep out of you on....In fact you defended pretty much all of their social policies. Sachs is a liberal but not a loon.

Your first two sentences would be fair on Sachs with Trump. What comes after that wouldn't.

Your denial that you don't believe the ends justify the means is wholly dishonest or self delusional. What you wrote on here about the Trump attempted assassination and Covid demonstrate that you have zero principles applied to your enemies....Unlike Sachs.

Sachs is much more nuanced in his analysis than you. He knows from the inside. You just think you know, from the outside. Whilst he certainly criticises the policies pursued by the US and NATO he doesn’t absolve Putin in any way. He believes we could have done it differently. Others disagree. Their views prevailed.

This misinformation that I, in some way, approved of the assassination attempt on Trump is both an insult and completely incorrect. I never approve of, or encourage the deliberate murder of anyone, no matter how awful they are. I might welcome the consequences but in the case of Trump even that isn’t true as what would follow has the potential to be worse. I would have preferred even Bin Laden to have been captured and put on trial, even if I understand the political implications of doing so. I believe in the rule of law. Not in the rule of the powerful. I want Trump and Trumpism consigned to history, and any who have broken the law, which looks to be many, to face the law. Done democratically, via the will of the people.

So kindly stop misrepresenting my views.

 

[georgenorman]

There really is no excuse whatsover if Trump militarily acts against Greenland.

 

[Forest Hillbilly]

There really is no excuse whatsover if Trump militarily acts against Greenland.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen to warn that any attack by the US would spell the end of Nato.

 

[georgenorman]

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen to warn that any attack by the US would spell the end of Nato.

It would spell the end of the world order as we know it and Europe will need to rearm as fast as possible.

 

[Eaglehamster]

All talk of the Epstein files has gone very quiet.
Funny that.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Sachs is much more nuanced in his analysis than you. He knows from the inside. You just think you know, from the outside. Whilst he certainly criticises the policies pursued by the US and NATO he doesn’t absolve Putin in any way. He believes we could have done it differently. Others disagree. Their views prevailed.

A distinction without a difference.

My views didn't differ from Sachs on the Ukraine war, from near the start.

You were diametrically opposed and you spent years arguing against what were in effect his points.

Then when what was obvious becomes unavoidable your stance softens.....Sorry, but it mattered years ago, not after the Lord Major's show......Poor judgement again and again.

Possibly over a million have died for what could have been stopped weeks after it started in 2022 with far better outcomes for Ukraine.....Ukraine is now economically destroyed and now countries like us have to now prop them up, when we have pensioners choosing between heating and eating. You were told this back in 2022 and wouldn't have it.

You are so dishonest that the fact you have done well in life is a poor reflection upon modern Britain since the war.

This misinformation that I, in some way, approved of the assassination attempt on Trump is both an insult and completely incorrect. I never approve of, or encourage the deliberate murder of anyone, no matter how awful they are. I might welcome the consequences but in the case of Trump even that isn’t true as what would follow has the potential to be worse.

Talking out of two sides of your mouth as usual.

Those who read your posts at the time can reach an objective opinion upon where the truth lies.

You have hateful anti white and other motivations and try to cover them for the sake of aesthetics and plausible deniability. But no one objective who has read you is fooled.

No principles other than what you want.

You trying to say Sachs is like you is a joke. That man, may be a liberal, but he actually has principles. The only similar aspect is that he doesn't like Trump.

I would have preferred even Bin Laden to have been captured and put on trial, even if I understand the political implications of doing so. I believe in the rule of law. Not in the rule of the powerful. I want Trump and Trumpism consigned to history, and any who have broken the law, which looks to be many, to face the law. Done democratically, via the will of the people.

So kindly stop misrepresenting my views.

I can't be bothered to spend any more time describing what you do here, other than to say I certainly don't think I misrepresent you at all.

There's a reason the Catholics got rid of you and that you hang out on more conservative sites.....Because they suffer you for the right of free speech. Because we are fundamentally much better people than you.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I would support the use of our conventional troops in the defence of Greenland.

If Trump used the military against Greenland I think it leads to the fall of his administration.

A lot of white people with European heritage make up the GOP's core vote......Disagreements is one thing, but bombing your own is another.

Unlike the US involvement in what happened in Ukraine, Greenland has done absolutely nothing to provoke anyone.

I can understand some agreement being reached on cooperation against Russia/China but taking Greenland into the US empire isn't acceptable.

 

[Badger11]

I would support the use of our conventional troops in the defence of Greenland.

If Trump used the military against Greenland I think it leads to the fall of his administration.

A lot of white people with European heritage make up the GOP's core vote......Disagreements is one thing, but bombing your own is another.

Unlike the US involvement in what happened in Ukraine, Greenland has done absolutely nothing to provoke anyone.

I can understand some agreement being reached on cooperation against Russia/China but taking Greenland into the US empire isn't acceptable.

Agreed. You can make an argument for Venezuela, a country has because of it's problems is destabilizing it's neighbours (refugees) and exporting death to the US. It has also refused to compensate US oil companies, yes I don't feel sorry for them either but the fact is an international court ordered compensation and they refused.

None of this applies to Greenland and if Trump does take over that is one NATO country invading another.

 

[Common Sense Club]

I would support the use of our conventional troops in the defence of Greenland.

If Trump used the military against Greenland I think it leads to the fall of his administration.

A lot of white people with European heritage make up the GOP's core vote......Disagreements is one thing, but bombing your own is another.

Unlike the US involvement in what happened in Ukraine, Greenland has done absolutely nothing to provoke anyone.

I can understand some agreement being reached on cooperation against Russia/China but taking Greenland into the US empire isn't acceptable.

The US already has military bases on Greenland. Apparently there used to be about 10,000 US personnel stationed there during the Cold War; it’s down to a couple of hundred now.
So, be prepared for a compromise with perhaps additional bases, higher number of US personnel based there and some form of long term lease arrangement.
It might also mean that the ‘need’ to bring Canada into the US governance is reduced if the US has semi control of territory nearer to Russia, which I assume is what it wants….or is it the mineral wealth beneath the ice?

 

[Stirlingsays]

The US already has military bases on Greenland. Apparently there used to be about 10,000 US personnel stationed there during the Cold War; it’s down to a couple of hundred now.
So, be prepared for a compromise with perhaps additional bases, higher number of US personnel based there and some form of long term lease arrangement.
It might also mean that the ‘need’ to bring Canada into the US governance is reduced if the US has semi control of territory nearer to Russia, which I assume is what it wants….or is it the mineral wealth beneath the ice?

I'm of the mind that Trump has put military action out there as a pressure point option.

I think it would be a step too far even for the Don.

As for the why for the US, I think it's both your suggestions.

 

[chris123]

Something of a dichotomy in terms of Russian security threats in different parts of Europe.

 

[Frenchaigle]

RFK delivered exactly what he promised which was to align with international consensus on core vaccines, rebuild trust and empower parents to make decisions.

The same trust he rebuilt in Samoa ? In 2019

 

[Stirlingsays]

Something of a dichotomy in terms of Russian security threats in different parts of Europe.

There are important differences.

Greenland, via Denmark is in Nato.

It's not a border country to either Russia nor China nor the US for that matter. If anything it would be a security concern for Canada.

It would be an unprovoked war of choice on a Nato country.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

A distinction without a difference.

My views didn't differ from Sachs on the Ukraine war, from near the start.

You were diametrically opposed and you spent years arguing against what were in effect his points.

Then when what was obvious becomes unavoidable your stance softens.....Sorry, but it mattered years ago, not after the Lord Major's show......Poor judgement again and again.

Possibly over a million have died for what could have been stopped weeks after it started in 2022 with far better outcomes for Ukraine.....Ukraine is now economically destroyed and now countries like us have to now prop them up, when we have pensioners choosing between heating and eating. You were told this back in 2022 and wouldn't have it.

You are so dishonest that the fact you have done well in life is a poor reflection upon modern Britain since the war.

You have made this assertion many times as though it is a fact. It isn’t. It’s wishful thinking which isn’t shared by Sachs. He thinks we didn’t do enough to try to negotiate at the time but isn’t so foolish as to suggest that means the war could be stopped. Sachs is no fool. He knows Putin cannot be trusted and that only the knowledge that he has more to lose than to gain will deter him. He wasn’t present during those negotiations. Who knows what the bottom line was and who refused the offers? Yes, it’s been very hard on Ukraine and is, and will continue to be, on us, but if you are dealing with Putin then trust cannot be part of any agreement. Sometimes decisions must be made between an awful outcome and a terrible one. Whilst I am glad I didn’t have to make it, I am even happier that you didn’t.

Talking out of two sides of your mouth as usual.

Those who read your posts at the time can reach an objective opinion upon where the truth lies.

You have hateful anti white and other motivations and try to cover them us only due to aesthetics and plausible deniability. But no one objective who has read you is fooled.

No principles other than what you want.

You trying to say Sachs is like you is a joke. That man, may be a liberal, but he actually has principles. The only similar aspect is that he doesn't like Trump.



I can't be bothered to spend any more time describing what you do here, other than to say I certainly don't think I misrepresent you at all.

There's a reason the Catholics got rid of you and that you hang out on more conservative sites.....Because they suffer you for the right of free speech. Because we are fundamentally much better people than you.

There you go again, using meaningless terminology that has no place in a decent society. What on earth does “anti-white” mean? Most of us judge people on their behaviour. Nothing else. You really need to reflect on these terms and begin to see them for what they are and the damage they do to any chance of your political views not being tainted by them.

I actually listen to Sachs. Not just to the bits I want to hear. He speaks from experience so deserves to be taken seriously. His is a very valuable contribution to the debate but not the only one. We are certainly aligned on the danger that Trump represents. Something that changes everything else. Whatever happened in 2022, or at any other time, must now be reevaluated. We live in a different, fast changing and dangerous world.

The Catholic Herald closed their forum shortly after the moderator decided to remove me. I had made a number of friends there with whom I discussed some of the more controversial aspects of Catholic attitudes and history. Being in the Philippines at the time I also reported on what I observed there. The Church’s involvement in politics, the high life of some clerics, the lies that were spread about the use of condoms being responsible for STDs, the consequences of a strictly enforced anti abortion regime etc. Things that people here were unaware of, but found both interesting and concerning. It was healthy and respectful, but the moderator couldn’t handle it, so eventually just banned me. Then they decided to stop having a discussion forum. That’s free speech?

If you believe that you are better than me I will only say this in response! Self praise is no recommendation!