[Action80]

Motivation for what takes place is the distinction and demonstrates what is taking place now in regard to NATO is not a matter of tribalism. The US doesn't need to be in NATO and should stop its participation in regime change wars and foreign interventionist activities.

[Dr Van Nostrand]

Motivation for what takes place is the distinction and demonstrates what is taking place now in regard to NATO is not a matter of tribalism. The US doesn't need to be in NATO and should stop its participation in regime change wars and foreign interventionist activities.

Yes, Putin has been saying this for years. NATO needs to stop interfering with his plans to conquer Europe.

Here's a place where you can sign up for travel as a volunteer to help make Russia great again. 
https://www.goabroad.com/providers/proba-language-centre/programs/volunteer-language-russia-44681

[Lord Dave]

Motivation for what takes place is the distinction and demonstrates what is taking place now in regard to NATO is not a matter of tribalism. The US doesn't need to be in NATO and should stop its participation in regime change wars and foreign interventionist activities.

Well, to start: The US should stop all that but it has nothing to do with NATO.

Secondly, the US does need NATO but not for protection.  Rather they need it to keep Europe in check.  To ensure no one conquers Europe and thus blocks alot of trade.  Oil being the big one.  If Russia, let's say, takes over all of Europe, oil could become very scarce to the US.  Plus, any military attack would have a very large ocean side front.

[honk]

If Trump (and everyone else, including you, by the way) knows one thing, and one thing only, it is he will be prosecuted for anything and everything.

No, he won't. They tried it already (poorly), and we saw what happened. The conservative majority of the Supreme Court protected Trump - not out of any real loyalty to him, of course, but simply out of cowardice - and they'd do it again if Trump appealed to them, which he would do if he were to be prosecuted again. So the next administration almost certainly won't bother trying again, and even if they do, he won't serve a day in prison. That's just the reality, and it's because the legal system (along with the people in it) is too dysfunctional and political in nature to bring Trump to justice, not because he's an innocent man. Trump won't go to jail no matter what he does.

Also, Trump's position on NATO has nothing to do with colonialism or the Monroe Doctrine. Trump doesn't know what either of those things are, and he also doesn't know what NATO is or what it does. As I said in another thread, Trump is simply going by his gut belief that NATO is a dues-based organization where every country "owes" the same amount, and because America pays more than any other countries, it is therefore being taken advantage of by other countries. This isn't true, of course, and anyone who knows even a little bit about NATO knows that it isn't true, but Trump famously trusts his gut over expert opinions or empirical evidence. He's not alone in this, given how (as I've also said in another thread), Trump owes his political success primarily to his voters' gut belief that he's a straightforward, honest, and relatable guy, despite all actual evidence pointing to the fact that he's actually a sleazy idiot.

In other news, we finally have the report that Trump fought so hard to bury about the creep he tried to make AG:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/23/politics/matt-gaetz-house-ethics-report/index.html

This report was released in spite of Trump's efforts, not because of them. Don't let Trump and his surrogates try and turn this into a story about how Trump played 5D chess and cleverly "exposed" Gaetz. No. If Trump had his way, Gaetz would be AG by now and this report would be buried. It's being released now because a few Republicans presumably came to their senses and joined Democrats in voting to release it.

[Action80]

People in Trump's own administration were prosecuting him...it is silly to suggest another administration would not.

Gaetz was never going to be AG.

Trump owes his political success to the same people who made Bush, Clinton, and Obama.

It might be possible the election results will not be certified.

Things are going to get real rough, real soon.

[Lord Dave]

Trump threatens Panama, Greenland, and Canada as his Christmas message.


The fuck?
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-canada-panama-canal-greenland-1235217402/

[Tom Bishop]

Why should I believe rollingstone.com that Trump Bad, when the author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad says the opposite?

https://twitter.com/TheRISEofROD/status/1705654096064024931

[Lord Dave]

Why should I believe rollingstone.com that Trump Bad, when the author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad says the opposite?

https://twitter.com/TheRISEofROD/status/1705654096064024931

would fox be better?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-christmas-message-radical-left-lunatics-tells-inmates-biden-granted-clemency-go-hell

Oddly enough, I can't find Trump's Christmas message on Truth social.  Tho he posts dozens of times in an hour so it's a bit difficult.  Especially since you must sign up to search and I can't sign up.

[Tom Bishop]

I don't think Fox is asserting that Trump did anything wrong in that link.

[Tom Bishop]

Looks like Kevin O'Leary is stepping up to start the discussions on giving away Rama Set's homeland to the USA

https://twitter.com/kevinolearytv/status/1872370621490909613

[Lord Dave]

I don't think Fox is asserting that Trump did anything wrong in that link.

Ahh, I thought you were doubting the text, not that you approve of threatening other nations if they don't give you their country.

Well, good to know you're a fan of Hitler.

[Tom Bishop]

The Hitler-Dictator comparison would be closer to what Canada is. Canada is controlled by a Monarchy, which is a system of rule that has been discarded by humanity for centuries. Even if you claim that the Monarch does nothing, which is false since they 'unofficially' get their desires, it is a Monarchy nonetheless.

Britain colonized the Americas by force, and keeps its citizens under rule of a Monarch by force. Trump is offering to buy and adopt into its representative democracy form of government. It is fairly clear who the dictator is here.

[Lord Dave]

The Hitler-Dictator comparison would be closer to what Canada is. Canada is controlled by a Monarchy, which is a system of rule that has been discarded by humanity for centuries. Even if you claim that the Monarch does nothing, which is false since they 'unofficially' get their desires, it is a Monarchy nonetheless.

Britain colonized the Americas by force, and keeps its citizens under rule of a Monarch by force. Trump is offering to buy and adopt into its representative democracy form of government. It is fairly clear who the dictator is here.

I'm not sure how you define "controlled" but its obviously not what the control of an actual monarchy. 

And I was more referring to the whole "Give us your land because we want it" attitude that Trump is showing.  Which is what Hitler did to Europe prior to WW2.  He demanded various bits of land around Germany or else.  Trump is demanding Canada AND Greenland AND the Panama Canal.  But sure, that's just a really nice guy who wants whats best for others, despite the fact that Canada has shown no desire to ever join the US as a "State" and is happy being their own country.  Greenland too.

[Tom Bishop]

Even if the King wasn't currently exercising his political power, the mere fact that a war could break out over something which Canada is not a part of and Canadians could be conscripted to die for their sovereign lord is unacceptable. It's a monarchy regardless of the excuses, which comes with vast life and death consequences.

I'm pretty sure in WWII Hitler took over countries by force and didn't "offer to buy" and suggest that they would be in a better situation if they joined with him.

[Pete Svarrior]

I'm pretty sure in WWII Hitler took over countries by force and didn't "offer to buy" and suggest that they would be in a better situation if they joined with him.

Lmao, Tom doesn't know about Hitler

[Lord Dave]

Even if the King wasn't currently exercising his political power, the mere fact that a war could break out over something which Canada is not a part of and Canadians could be conscripted to die for their sovereign lord is unacceptable. It's a monarchy regardless of the excuses, which comes with vast life and death consequences.

It's a good thing this can't happen unless the Canadian parliament reinstituted conscription.  And Canada declares war or other alliances come into effect.

I'm pretty sure in WWII Hitler took over countries by force and didn't "offer to buy" and suggest that they would be in a better situation if they joined with him.

What Pete said.

[Tom Bishop]

It's a good thing this can't happen unless the Canadian parliament reinstituted conscription.  And Canada declares war or other alliances come into effect.

Okay, so a war starts against the British Crown and Canada reinstitutes conscription, citing existential threat against the monarchy, and they send Canadians to die for its King.

Alternatively, Canada can simply have no King and this scenario would not be possible.

I'm pretty sure in WWII Hitler took over countries by force and didn't "offer to buy" and suggest that they would be in a better situation if they joined with him.

What Pete said.

I trust Google AI more

> how did hitler take over other countries

AI Overview

"Hitler took over other countries by using a combination of military force, political manipulation, and a strategy of appeasement from other nations, gradually expanding German territory through annexations like the "Anschluss" of Austria, the occupation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, and eventually invading Poland, which triggered World War II; he often exploited ethnic German populations in neighboring countries as a pretext for claiming territory, while also utilizing the threat of military action to pressure other governments into submission."

[Lord Dave]

It's a good thing this can't happen unless the Canadian parliament reinstituted conscription.  And Canada declares war or other alliances come into effect.

Okay, so a war starts against the British Crown and Canada reinstitutes conscription, citing existential threat against the monarchy, and they send Canadians to die for its King.


Alternatively, Canada can simply have no King and this scenario would not be possible.

In such a case, Canadians would be conscripted to die for the UK as they are in a military alliance. 

I'm pretty sure in WWII Hitler took over countries by force and didn't "offer to buy" and suggest that they would be in a better situation if they joined with him.

What Pete said.

I trust Google AI more

> how did hitler take over other countries

AI Overview

"Hitler took over other countries by using a combination of military force, political manipulation, and a strategy of appeasement from other nations, gradually expanding German territory through annexations like the "Anschluss" of Austria, the occupation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, and eventually invading Poland, which triggered World War II; he often exploited ethnic German populations in neighboring countries as a pretext for claiming territory, while also utilizing the threat of military action to pressure other governments into submission."

You're not even trying anymore, are you?

[Tom Bishop]

If you are in a military alliance and you don't agree with how your ally got into war, you can simply leave the alliance. In contrast, the British Crown does not allow its territories to leave as easily, and has resulted in conflicts and deaths of those who have tried. One situation is a mutual agreement of both parties, and in the other situation one party has a gun to the head of another.

Trump has offered to buy and lists several benefits Canada would have if it were to join the US. This is nothing like how Hitler acquired his territories. The only authoritarianism here is the monarchy which Canada exists under, and shame on you guys for defending it.

[Lord Dave]

If you are in a military alliance and you don't agree with how your ally got into war, you can simply leave the alliance. In contrast, the British Crown does not allow its territories to leave as easily, and has resulted in conflicts and deaths of those who have tried. One situation is a mutual agreement of both parties, and in the other situation one party has a gun to the head of another.

Trump has offered to buy and lists several benefits Canada would have if it were to join the US. This is nothing like how Hitler acquired his territories. The only authoritarianism here is the monarchy which Canada exists under, and shame on you guys for defending it.

Just curious... what's your basis for the idea that the King can command Canada to go to war?  I'm not seeing that power listed in the various laws.  Have you considered that you don't know shit?


Also: How exactly would trump even BUY canada?  And what benefits would they have going from a self governing country to ... a state, under America, with shitty healthcare, lax environmental laws, and incredibly poor labor protections?