Scholz calls for state of emergency

[tomazbodner]

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Yep. America is always the good guy, even when it does f'd up things.

 

You are free to choose your own master. 

OK, I'm America. GIve me all your money.

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, tomazbodner said:

Both of them want to take all your money. You just have polarized glasses on so you can only see one side doing it.

So, they're all bad, so no need to choose. 

[Yagoda]

13 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

OK, I'm America. GIve me all your money.

That makes no sense. 

 

And yes, some stalker will roll along and say in response

 

"well nothing you say ever makes sense"

 

3-2-1

[MicroB]

7 hours ago, RayC said:

 

More of your usual Russian apologist propaganda with a bit of rhetoric against the Western democratic model thrown in for good measure.

 

Btw: You are wrong (yet again) in your analysis of WW2. The German Military High Command warned Hitler against starting a war in 1938, as it knew that it was incapable of defeating the European Allies at that time: The Luftwaffe was not ready for war; the combined land forces of the UK and France outnumbered Germany's and the Royal Navy had military superiority.

 

If Chamberlain had supported Czechoslovakia over the Sudetenland, then events would have turned out very differently. For example and critically, it is almost unthinkable that the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact would have been signed. Indeed, given that Russia had a mutual assistance pact with Czechoslovakia (and a pact of sorts with France), if the UK and France had faced down Hitler's aggression - while at the same time increasing their own rearmament - it is extremely likely that Stalin would have joined the allies in any war against Germany in 1938/9, and there is no way that Germany could have successfully fought on so many fronts as was proven by events from 1943 onwards.

 

It was an example how Germany, no through any deliberate ploy, was able to exploit division. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.

 

It was repeated when Japan attacked the Americans and the British.  Japan in 1941, should not have been able to defeat British and American forces. But it did.

"Giving Signals" is so important. The UK and US will have teams of "Moscow Watchers", and ditto over in Moscow, pouring over hidden meanings in speeches. So-called diplomatic speak, when one side wants to convey a message in a non-overt way. But the American administration is currently chaotic and contradicts itself. Defenders will say thats a deliberate ploy "Keep 'Em Guessing". If it is, its extremely dangerous, because it leads to mistake and disaster.

 

When the British government withdrew HMS Endurance from the South Atlantic, th Fascist Junta in Buenos Aires took that as a signal from the British government that it was no longer prepared to defend the Falkland Islands. Argentine Marines hit Stanley hoping to kill the Royal Marines in their bunks. But there was some intel, and the RM were able to get out, defend positions, and surrender in an orderly way without being murdered.

 

 

London gave the wrong signals, and as a result, hundreds of men on both side died. On the upside, the Junta was overthrown, much to Alexander Haig's consternation. Ironically, the US government was giving mixed messaging over who it was backing, and it took a meber of the US political opposion to make very clear where the US stood. it was much appreciated.

 

Trumpf is right that its unlikely Russia would have visciously attacked  Ukraine in the way it did if it had received different signals from the West. But its clear, based on the actions of his previous administration, that he would have been any more clear in his messaging. Afghanistan is evidence of that, in his hopeless messaging to the Taliban and Russia, who was paying a bonus for every American soldier killed.

 

 

 

[jts-khorat]

On 2/14/2025 at 1:01 PM, Lacessit said:

IIRC NATO membership is dependent on a unanimous vote of existing members to admit a new member.

 

Under Trump, the US would never agree, as he is too busy kissing Putin's rear end.

 

If Trump pulled out of NATO, that would clear the way.

 

OTOH, it would also signal to the rest of the world an alliance with America is worthless.

 

Looking at the wars since Vietnam, having been an ally of the USA has always been worthless and ended in betrayal.

 

Maybe it is time not to wait for Trump to betray NATO, but to actively kick the USA out of it?

[NoDisplayName]

On 2/15/2025 at 5:34 AM, NoDisplayName said:

........as offended liverwurst.

 

For the confused amongst us:

 

Ukraine’s ambassador to Germany has accused the German chancellor of behaving like an “offended liver sausage” by declining to visit Kyiv. In comments to the German Press Agency published Tuesday, Andriy Melnyk suggested Olaf Scholz was being childish for opting out of a visit after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky snubbed German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier last month, declining his offer to meet because he said Steinmeier had cultivated close ties with Moscow. “Playing an offended liverwurst doesn’t sound very statesmanlike,” Melnyk said of Scholz’s decision, using a German colloquialism commonly employed to describe someone as a prima donna.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ukrainian-ambassador-andriy-melnyk-dubs-german-chancellor-olaf-scholz-an-offended-liver-sausage/

[Lacessit]

3 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

 

Looking at the wars since Vietnam, having been an ally of the USA has always been worthless and ended in betrayal.

 

Maybe it is time not to wait for Trump to betray NATO, but to actively kick the USA out of it?

History shows America goes into wars dragging its allies with it, then pulls out when the American public is tired of the cost, in money or bodies.

 

The US is great at 100 metre sprints. It's no good for distance events.