Roadsternut

Natives like this.

I think your opinion is of the same value as Mr White's. You don't represent most British people either. You might represent people who think like you, that's about it. Maybe like convicted drug dealers such as Stephen Lennon. One snapshot from January 2025 https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/britons-on-trump/

He's a writer. Why should any opinion matter? No one's opinion "matters". He penned that piece 5 years ago. Its not current news.

Even X had blocked him because of the content of his posts.

Were you an avid listener, receiving your orders, of Radio Moscow in the 1980s? Forget to renew your membership of CPGB? Obviously you are spouting <deleted> when citing a country that sends you to the labour camps for googling about Tiananmen Square, or a country that locks up and murders the political opposition. You must be either Chinese, or a Communist, or both.

There you have it. A confession.

He does.

Given how he got the job, unlikely.

Which will be rejected out of hand by Russia, due to the reality of security guarantees by US/NATO. Russia will automatically reject any plan that involves NATO troops on the ground. Following the annexation of Crimea, unarmed OSCE monitors were in place to report on the movement of heavy arms, as part of the monitoring of the ceasefire. OSCE drones were frequently interfered with, staff were arrested and detained for no reason. OSCE members who happened to be Russian or Ukrainian ended up being arrested by the seperatists, and tried for treason. International funding must not be made available to Russia to rebuild and support activities in the occupied areas. These areas should bleed Russia dry until they realise they have more to lose from retaining them, that gaining from them.

It is for Turkey and Greece, Iceland and the UK, Spain and the UK. The US has never proposed taking over the state of Denmark. Its questioning Danish sovereignty in Greenland. How do you define a border dispute if its not about territorial rights?

You're a child. You probably don't remember Yugoslavia. Before you were born. We all remember WW2, even though we weren't there. You probably discount the Holocaust as it was so long ago. But I'm debating with a Commie, so whats the point. I've already blocked other confessed Commies.

Its an actual thing, with the term used by people like Jackson Hinkle. It solves the issue why Hitler is seen as right wing, but also as left wing. Politics is seen as like a spectrum. At one end you have the far Right, and at the other, the Far Left, and, conventionally, never the twain shall meet. But the horse shoe theory is that the far right and far left actually come close together, and ape each other in both some beliefs and tactics. The Far Right and Far Left like to blacklist their enemies. They frequently denounce people. They increasingly support state intervention in industry. The theory lead to Nick Griffin, head of the British National Party, endorsing George Galloway. Of course, its doesn't always hold. But Communists and MAGA often find more agreement with each other, than the centre, which both hold in contempt Left or Right?

Bin Laden's 1998 Fatwa for a start. Other non-entities saying the same thing include Fathi Hammad. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said it on more than one occasion (though he tried to walk that back). The language employed by Iran lead the US House Foreign Affairs Committee to call upon a ban of Iran for issuing such genocidal language. Honest, what this bloke is saying isn't news. He doesn't deserve the publicity.

Yep, you back up my statement. You do realise that "Al Qaeda in the Arabian Penninsula" is the name of the franchise he's heading. He wasn't crowned the head of Al Qaeda in a town in the Arabian Penninsula.

There's that as well; the Steve Bannon tactic. Create noise, meanwhile some small bit of legislation gets through.

If the order was illegal, they would not follow that order. However, they might advise how an order could be issued that was legal. Legally, Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, but its status is more like the status of St Helena and the Falklands have to the UK. Consider the Chagos islands; sovereignty is passing from the UK to Mauritius, But the UK is then leasing Diego Garcia from Mauritius, ensuring the US has use of the basing there, at least for 99 years. Hong Kong Island was a Crown Colony, a British possession, but Kowloon and the islands were leased from China, The US is now claiming they don't need Greenland minerals, as they have plenty themselves ("rare earths" are ubiquitous in mine tailings), and its more to do with national security concerns (you'd hope its about mutual security concerns). I need to look into the legal basis of US forces in Greenland; what's the basing agreement. US bases in the UK are guaranteed through a mixture of NATO agreements and an Act of Parliament. In theory, parliament could abolish the act, and US access to UK bases would stop the moment the UK or US ceases to be a NATO member. Its probably similar to Greenland. A leasing arrangement might be a mechanism ensuring more certainty for the US. At the moment, Denmark can ask the US to leave at any time, such as following an election. A lease though is free of electoral changes, its enduring, for 99 years (or more). Not sure why the US is not discussing this, as surely that would enable Greenlanders the option of remaining Danish (Russia could have done the same in the Donbas, but they are a bit thick).

You're right, but some Americans don't seem to care what the Greenlanders want. Its about what apparently America wants. That's what America First means.

Border disputes between NATO members are covered by Article 1 of the Charter. Members are obligated to follow a diplomatic path.

Zmisha is a troll pretending to be Russian. He's probably probably a Chadian.

In a legal sense, the UK would have first refusal on Greenland, following a treaty signed between Denmark and the United States, following the Great War.

He's not "Al Qaeda Leader" now matter how much you keep copy pasting that statement. Even the US government says he is not the leader of Al Qaeda. Bit player. And being a "leader" of a terrorist group does not make you a <deleted> leader of muslims, any more than an IRA commander speaks for Catholics. Who the <deleted> cares what he says? I don't.

1987, Lebanon 1990s, siege of Sarajevo; Serbian Orthodox snipers taking potshots of Bosnians for being Muslim. Massacre of men and boys at Srebinica. Innumerable crimes by blokes with big crosses hanging around their necks.

MAGA Commie, that's the truth.

Er, this bloke isn't a "muslim leader" any more than Gerry Adams is a leader of the Irish. He's not even "leader" of "Al Qaeda", whatever that is, instead he's the self declared "Emir" of a Yemeni franchise of the movement (AQAP). He only got the job after Khalid Batarfi croaked in 2024. It goes with the job, issuing blood curdling threats against anyone and anyone's dog. He's joshing for influence against his mortal enemies in Daesh, not forgetting what he views as Shia' scum in Iran. It is positively evil for you to compare this bozo to an elected Prime Minister. Its an absolute falsehood for you to compare Israel to this bunch of loons and losers. Netanyahu does not lead the Jews. He is Prime Minister of Israel. He doesn't even lead all Israelis because a lot of them voted for some other bloke, let alone issuing orders to Jews in other countries. I would hope everyone on the forum would utterly repudiate any democratically elected leader who was calling for the mass slaughter of people based on either a passport colour or a faith. If you think that is a fair game thing to say, that should not be condemned, then sod off. If there is lack of reaction to the latest rant issued by the latest non-entity leading a part of an increasingly irrelevant movement, then its because we've heard it all before for 40 years. Maybe you haven't, and have just woken up from a coma. It literally changes nothing. This is not a Barry the Convert moment. Go back to hiding under the table.

Aramco research https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/the-russian-oil-price-cap-can-work-again