Woof999

OK, maybe Brexit wasn't such a bad idea.

Nothing worse than someone suggesting that all farangs have socialist idealogies or that all socialist ideas are inherently bad.

Not without going though me buddy. As of an hour ago, I'm Lorenzo's sole agent.

What are these traditional values you speak of? Make laws based on a religious fiction text book? Ignore science when making policy around technology / medicine? Control the reproductive rights of 50% of the population, regardless of the desires of the individual? The US has a history going back... not very far, yet has a party that clings to this history as if it had shaped the world for a millenia.

Perhaps those with more than half a brain will disagree with you?

Poisinous means that it would be harmful for you to eat it. Whether a snake is venomous or not and if the fangs are at the front or back of the mouth is more important to know.

Stainless steel will still be ~70% iron. It's the chromium / nickel / manganese (and possible other) metals added that make it (mostly) stainless.

I should have mentioned my biggest pet hate. Divisiveness.

Dodge? Give it a break. I've answered the question several times. I believe Trump will cut funding. Go on, ask me again and get the same answer. Me believing Trump will cut funding to Ukraine is an attack on Trump? Wow. I don't know the end game. I'm not pretending to know the end game. Press all you like. Condescention? Really? Was the border bill that failed the Senate vote in May not bipartisan? Was it not significantly negotiated by James Lankford? On the flip side, Mike Johnson tries to do a deal with the Dems and is immediately attacked by MTG and wider MAGA. Abortion for one... the "leave it up to the individual States" cop out fools nobody. Also, any and all positions that try to tie government and religion. Religion and policy do not belong together. Asked and answered. Right now Republican and MAGA are the same thing. Do you disagree? If so, why? The Afghanistan withdrawal? If that's what you mean, who intially negitiated that withdrawal and set the timescale? Did the almost complete lack of handover at a critical time not impede it?

Because I've seen no evidence to the contrary. What do you think GOP is suggesting? As above. Again, what do you think Trump will do? I didn't say boots on the ground. Yes, 2008 borders would be a good goal. Achievable or not is a different matter. MAGA and Republican are now effectively one and the same thing. EVERYTHING is my way or the highway. Bipartisan does not exist. If any suggestion comes from somewhere other than MAGA then it must be bad, purely because of that one fact, nothing to do with the merits of the idea. Err, no it's not. You seem to be suggesting that Putin's invasion was based on Trump no longer being in power and Biden projecting weakness. I'm suggesting that it was nothing of the sort. Press all you like, I've given my answer. So is he predictable or not? This comment is at odds with your last comment about him being unpredictable. and so we disagree on that point.

He could, but that would appear to be the opposite of what GOP are suggesting. How I see it ending and how I want it to end are two different things. Ukraine cannot defeat Russia on their own. However, believing that a short term solution (which is all that Trump will offer, and will strip Ukraine of any dignity in the name of "peace") will stop Putin's longer term goals is naive. On the ropes against Ukraine only, no? However, Putin cannot defeat a Ukraine that has the unwavering (indirect) support of NATO. Whether Ukraine with that same support can push back Putin is a different question. Quite possible not. Putin would play the long game given the chance. Whether his grip on power would survive that long game is another matter. Capitalism along with some social welfare. Limited immigration based on what benefits that immigration brings to the nation, along with at least some empathy to refugees. However, I don't think that the centre right exists in the US any more, certainly not in GOP. That is what cost them the last election. MAGA is too extreme and, although the extreme left also exists, it hasn't yet totally destroyed what remains of the centralists. I'll turn that on its head. I don't think Putin didn't FURTHER invade Ukraine BECAUSE Trump was in power. Correct, but he's unpredicatable on almost every front. What you might argue is a strength against Putin can also be see as a weakness for everything else. An unpredicatable government is not a good mix with capitalism. It's not a good quality for foreign relations with allies. He's also quite predictable on a number of things linked to his vanity. Blow some smoke up his arse and he'll love you, regardless of who or what you stand for.

That's part of the issue. Trump makes bold claims but rarely tells us how he will achieve them. Short of withdawing funding, what do you think he'll do? I can't see him doing anything other than capitulating to Putin 100%. In this phase yes. It will allow Putin to keep all of his gains and look like the great victor in the eyes of his people. It will leave Ukraine with... what? Some form of peace for a short period of time. It certainly wont remove any of the risk of another invasion. With Finland now in NATO, what does an assurance that Ukraine wont join give Putin in the grander scheme? Finland in NATO is a least the same threat to Putin as Ukraine, except that Finland was never part of USSR (officially). Again, to me, this points so Putin's real goal being the re-formation of the union. He always saw its fall as the greatest defeat. A former controlled nation being part of NATO is the issue (Putin loses face), not the fact that they are a direct neighbour. My opinion of course. Putin is not one to give up. Pause, take stock and attack again is more his MO. Remember that he has as long as it takes. He has effectively installed himself as Russia's permanent leader, no matter how much other posters here try to convince us that Russia is a legitimate, functioning democracy. Can you name any world leader that does not have a limit to the length of their government who exudes world peace? I can't. Interesting that you say I'm on the left. Historically I never was. I support many traditionally right wing policies, although I've also softened on others over the years. I don't support Trump. The guy is the epitomy of weakness. An ally or not of Putin, Trump enables Putin. What makes me really laugh is that Trump probably believes that Putin, Xi Jingping and perhaps Little Kim has respect for him. I bet they can't believe their luck.

Good questions and I don't pretend to have the answers. Trump was a surprise winner in the 2020 election. I doubt that any of Putin's plans were changed because Trump came to power. However, Trump has made it pretty clear that he'll stop all (or close to all) funding for Ukraine and that will bring only one outcome. No I don't particularly want to see NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine, BUT, do you really think that Putin will be happy with only the Donbas region plus Crimea? Do you really think he will stop before Ukraine no longer exists as a nation? He's already pretty much said that this is his goal. Once achieved, Russia will have an even bigger border with NATO. We're going off topic here, but if, like many here have tried to convince, Putin's whole reason for invading Ukraine was to add a greater buffer between Russia and NATO then he has already lost. Finland joining NATO massively increased the direct NATO > Russia border. I don't know the exact figures but I believe it more than doubled the direct border. Putin is not a stupid man. The NATO buffer is BS. He wants Ukraine. He wants more than Ukraine. Trump will, unwittingly or not, help him achieve this.

5 or 6 times, I can't remember exactly. Lovely people on the whole, I spent a fair amount of time there, from Kiev all the way through Poltava and further to Kharkiv. Found many more vodkas to add to my collection that first started on my several visits to St Petersburg. Ukraine borders many other European nations and the word is much smaller than many people imagine. Anyway, thanks for asking, but there is no pretence on my side. Why do you care so little about Ukraine, pretence or not?

He didn't need to. He already had Crimea, which changed not one iota under Trump (and I'm not for one minute blaming that on Trump) and was already destabilising Donbas. Do you think his planning for the wider invasion of Ukraine only started when Trump left office? Should Trump return, Putin's grasp on Ukraine will be solidified further, so to suggest that Ukraine is better off under Trump is a little disingenious at best.

My apologies. I assumed you were older than 5.

I think I'd leave that conclusion up to the people of Ukraine. Putin effectively winning and being empowered on his quest to try and recover the lands of the USSR is good news for nobody. An emboldened Xi Jingping makes the world safer? How?

On a personal level it probably wouldn't mean much to me. My savings are mostly in USD so I'd probably need to divest them, as USD would likely weaken under Trump. It would be very bad news for Ukraine. Possibly the same for Taiwan and anyone close to the South China Sea. Looking on the bright side though, it would be fantastic entertainment.

I agree. That would be very bad luck indeed.

It would be easy for him to maintain power. All he'd need to do would be to call up the fringe states and ask them to find some extra votes. Or replace the state electors with his own. Or refuse to handover to the president elect. Or urge his supporters to storm the Capitol. Or instruct his vice-president not to certify the result. Of course that is all fantasy and no sitting president would ever stoop so low.

What are you, the Death Star? Am I being threatened by a real live Sith? Do you want an adult debate or just backwards and forwards with "my dad is better than your dad". If it's the latter, jog on.

Yet the economic data says otherwise. I'm sure he's pretty crap on some metrics, but what are they? How do they make him "the worst ever"? Stop just repeating Trump's absolutisms (which is all he ever does) and quote some real data to support it.

Now will you turn your all seeing eye on Trump? You're happy to list any brain fart from Biden while giving Trump a free reign to be a moron. It's difficult to take you seriously (were you ever serious) when you critique is one sided.

Well now, the problem with your comment and the esteemed "save the frogs" comment is that neither of you fact checked the data on which you based it. Where did Biden state that he pulled out of the race because he is not fit to run? Of course, I'm not expecting you to admit to being wrong. You righties just don't do that.

The US border with Mexico is now the worst and most dangerous anywhere in the World? It's more dangerous than Ukraine <> Russia, or North Korea <> South Korea? Trump is a young man? He's not now the oldest nominee ever from the two major parties? Does nobody in MAGA ever question the crap that this fool spouts?