Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Coached my son's first spring soccer game this morning. At halftime a mom came over to talk to me and her kid, they were speaking a different language. I asked her where she was from, she said Ukraine. I instinctively slumped my shoulders and said "I'm sorry..." She knew where I was going, and politely said thank you and "it's a mess". Felt sick to my stomach. So embarrassed of our country. 
 

…pics?
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Can we have Zelensky as our president? You can tell how much he cares for the people he governs. It's not just lip service.

I think I speak for everyone who pays attention and understands, I couldn't agree more. That's a man with purpose and substance and humanity.

 

18 hours ago, Red Five said:

It wouldn't solve anything overnight, but it's the necessary first step. 

Plus, there is no cult of JD Vance. I think you'd see some fevers break. 

I don't think it would even be a baby step, my friend.

This morning I was just sitting idly and wondered about the possibilities after that first step. Prior to this, I'd only thought about Vance likely being worse. But it's worse than I thought because he puts the GOP criminal organization back in charge. Trump is not the means they would have chosen, but he has succeeded through the guidance of Project 2025, his own pettiness and cacophony of other vile traits, and a willing chunk of the electorate to fast track GOP plans.

They have control of the courts. They've created an imperial executive branch. They're freeing the robber barons through destroying regulations and replacing good-faith civil servants with toadies. They have a good grip on the election process. 

The hate engine is as much an institution now as the press. Vance settles in and the GOP can go back to work with their preferred lower profile. 

Look at the Trumpists betrayed by Trump. They still want to believe and want to find a reason to stick. They won't be looking to become ebil lib socialists. They'll follow the hate.

 

14 hours ago, Ojo Rojo said:

It has to come from the populace. Politicians don't create the message so much as follow it.  If disavowing Ukraine and disrespecting its wartime leader is unpopular among Americans, the politicians will follow.  But there has to be massive upswell to leave no doubt.  Protests, social media posts, civil disobedience, every possible way of showing that the people of the United States are not for this.

Nobody cares. If the non-voting public couldn't be moved to register and vote against tyranny, why would they take to the streets? They're making their car payments and posting soccer pictures on facebook and way too busy with the mundane to look up and see the war all around them.

But, you're right about what it will take. The pussy hat demonstration in 2017 was so promising to me. I thought women would be the key to rejecting this vile movement. But enough of them were made afraid of gay grooming in the schools, transexuals using the bathroom, and dreams of The Kingdom that I turned out to be way off.

It's a rear guard action now. Focus on protecting the persecuted and joining the objects of racism. We're in a game of tactics because there is no winning strategy today. Maybe tomorrow. I truly hope so. Perhaps Fortuna will step in. 

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, AnTiM said:

Hopefully all of our former allies will eventually unite and save our asses from the thugs, thieves and morons who now control our country.

Since history doesn't repeat but rhymes, maybe Europe will save our continent from fascism one day, and we'll speak of the bombing of College Station instead of Dresden.

Edited by bolverk
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Posted
6 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Europe (France in particular) already saved our asses from imperialism during the Revolution.  

Does anyone really think the US would exist without their help?

The role we were playing for Ukraine was very much akin to the one France played for us versus the UK, minus the actual fighting alongside the Continental Army part.

It offers an interesting speculative historical scenario to play out how the US would be different today had they not come to our aid. It'd certainly be a cool topic to discuss with some of the smarty-pants amateur historians around here.

Maybe we'd be Canada's 51st state instead, which doesn't seem too bad right about now.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I am completely serious when I say that a big part of Trump and Vance fracturing the transatlantic alliance is to poison the well early and cut us off from our natural friends and allies who might help us find the way back.

Zelenskyy is 100 times the human being and leader than the menagerie of grotesques who accosted him at the Oval. 

Oh, 100% agreed. Same as UKIP (also Kremlin-backed) with Brexit, separating them from Europe. 

It's the time-honored divide and conquer strategy.

  • Like 5
Posted

damn

every fucking day now i wake up feeling this fucking dread being an American. 

unlike these dickheads in the oval office i need to sleep at nite and need to have a good soul to do that. not sure wtf happened to these rest of the souls in the building. its so fucking depressing. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
On 2/28/2025 at 2:45 PM, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Expecting a really strong pro-Ukraine statement from one of our two brave Senators after getting this email today:

Dear Greaseball Bob:

 Thank you for contacting me regarding U.S. policy in response to the war in Ukraine. I appreciate the benefit of your comments on this matter.

 Russia launched an invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022, violating Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Thanks to the bravery of Ukrainian soldiers and weaponry supplied by the U.S. and its allies, the vast majority of the country's territory remains in Ukrainian hands; however, the war has caused significant human suffering and economic devastation.

Recognizing the immense human cost of this war, President Trump and his administration began negotiations with Ukraine and Russia to bring about an end to hostilities and ensure a durable peace. The U.S. made significant investments in Ukraine's defense, the majority of which have been invested back into our defense industrial base and U.S. forces. President Trump is now working to secure a critical minerals agreement with Ukraine that can promote Ukrainian economic development, repay the U.S. for its assistance to Ukraine during the war, and serve as a deterrent to Russia. Vladimir Putin's history of territorial expansionism demonstrates that Ukraine, the U.S., and its allies must ensure that there exists a credible deterrent to prevent further Russian aggression directed toward Ukraine or NATO member states. We cannot signal to other adversaries threatening our country's security and trade interests, such as China, North Korea, and Iran, that aggression will go unpunished. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I look forward to engaging with my colleagues and the administration on this issue.

As your representative in the United States Senate, I appreciate the opportunity to hear your views and concerns about U.S. policy towards Ukraine. I will keep your thoughts in mind as these matters are considered in the 119th Congress. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

 

JOHN CORNYN

United States Senator


    Certifiably Surly
        2.4k

    #10362  

Posted Friday at 02:45 PM

Expecting a really strong pro-Ukraine statement from one of our two brave Senators after getting this email today:

Dear Greaseball Bob:

 Thank you for contacting me regarding U.S. policy in response to the war in Ukraine. I appreciate the benefit of your comments on this matter.

 Russia launched an invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022, violating Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Thanks to the bravery of Ukrainian soldiers and weaponry supplied by the U.S. and its allies, the vast majority of the country's territory remains in Ukrainian hands; however, the war has caused significant human suffering and economic devastation.

Recognizing the immense human cost of this war, President Trump and his administration began negotiations with Ukraine and Russia to bring about an end to hostilities and ensure a durable peace. The U.S. made significant investments in Ukraine's defense, the majority of which have been invested back into our defense industrial base and U.S. forces. President Trump is now working to secure a critical minerals agreement with Ukraine that can promote Ukrainian economic development, repay the U.S. for its assistance to Ukraine during the war, and serve as a deterrent to Russia. Vladimir Putin's history of territorial expansionism demonstrates that Ukraine, the U.S., and its allies must ensure that there exists a credible deterrent to prevent further Russian aggression directed toward Ukraine or NATO member states. We cannot signal to other adversaries threatening our country's security and trade interests, such as China, North Korea, and Iran, that aggression will go unpunished. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I look forward to engaging with my colleagues and the administration on this issue.

As your representative in the United States Senate, I appreciate the opportunity to hear your views and concerns about U.S. policy towards Ukraine. I will keep your thoughts in mind as these matters are considered in the 119th Congress. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

 

JOHN CORNYN

United States Senator

+++

DEAR JOHN:

EUROPE SAYS SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9vygkzkkrvo

Starmer announces 'coalition of the willing' to guarantee Ukraine peace
2 hours ago
Vicky Wong
BBC News

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced a four-point plan to work with Ukraine to end the war and defend the country from Russia.

The UK, France and other countries will step up their efforts in a "coalition of the willing" and seek to involve the US in their support for Ukraine, he said.

"We are at a crossroads in history today," Starmer said after a summit of 18 leaders - mostly from Europe and including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who said Ukraine felt "strong support" and the summit showed "European unity at an extremely high level not seen for a long time".

It comes two days after a fiery exchange between the Ukrainian leader and US President Donald Trump in the White House.

"We are all working together in Europe in order to find a basis for cooperation with America for a true peace and guaranteed security," Zelensky said after the summit.

Speaking at a news conference shortly after the meeting of leaders, Starmer said four points had been agreed:

    to keep military aid flowing into Ukraine, and to keep increasing the economic pressure on Russia
    that any lasting peace must ensure Ukraine's sovereignty and security and Ukraine must be present at any peace talks
    in the event of a peace deal, to boost Ukraine's defensive capabilities to deter any future invasion
    to develop a "coalition of the willing" to defend a deal in Ukraine and to guarantee peace afterwards

Sir Keir also announced an additional £1.6bn ($2bn) of UK export finance to buy more than 5,000 air defence missiles. This comes on top of a £2.2bn loan to provide more military aid to Ukraine backed by profits from frozen Russian assets.

"We have to learn from the mistakes of the past, we cannot accept a weak deal which Russia can breach with ease, instead any deal must be backed by strength," he said.

The prime minister did not state which countries had agreed to join this coalition of the willing, but said that those who had committed would intensify planning with real urgency.

The UK, he said, would back its commitment with "boots on the ground, and planes in the air".

"Europe must do the heavy lifting," he said, before adding that the agreement would need US backing and had to include Russia, but that Moscow could not be allowed to dictate terms.

"Let me be clear, we agree with Trump on the urgent need for a durable peace. Now we need to deliver together," Sir Keir said.

When asked if the US under Trump was an unreliable ally, he said: "Nobody wanted to see what happened last Friday, but I do not accept that the US is an unreliable ally."

Countries at the summit included France, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, Norway, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Romania, Finland, Italy, Spain and Canada.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that there was now an urgent need to "re-arm Europe".

These sentiments were echoed by Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte, who said the meeting had seen European countries "stepping up" to make sure Ukraine has what it needs to "stay in the fight as long as it has to continue".

After the summit, Zelensky went to Sandringham where he met King Charles III. He later spoke to reporters at a final press briefing where he said he was ready to sign a deal on minerals with the US.

Ukraine was expected to sign the deal - which would grant the US access to Ukraine's rare mineral reserves - during Zelensky's visit to Washington, but the Ukrainian delegation ultimately left early after a heated confrontation with Trump in the Oval Office.

Earlier on Sunday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned a deal on minerals between the US and Ukraine could not be signed "without a peace deal" with Russia.

But when asked by the BBC about the future of the deal following the summit, Zelensky said it was ready to be signed.

"The agreement that's on the table will be signed if the parties are ready," he said.

Sunday's summit concludes a hectic week of diplomacy, which included visits to Washington by French President Emmanuel Macron, Sir Keir and Zelensky.

Zelensky's meeting, however, culminated in a heated exchanged with Trump and US Vice-President JD Vance, in which the US president accused his Ukrainian counterpart of "gambling with World War Three".

Trump has said he wants to end the war in Ukraine and has expressed trust in Russian President Vladimir Putin, to the consternation of many of his Western allies.

The US has also begun peace talks with Russia - excluding Ukraine.

At one point, the US leader accused Ukraine of starting the war - even though it was Putin who launched a full-scale invasion of Russia's neighbour on 24 February 2022.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
On 2/28/2025 at 4:19 PM, Schulz2.0 said:

Infantino is buddies with Trump. Corrupt dipshits love other corrupt dipshits.

the "esl" clubs run the show now

and the english have proven that if your money is dirty, they will in effect nationalize your club

uefa can force a relocation of next year's cup if they want

Posted
On 3/1/2025 at 11:54 AM, bluto said:

I know the answer but why isn’t Trump turning their ire toward the ppl who actually approved the Ukraine funding. The 31 gop senators and 100+ gop house reps. 

quoting forward

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
10 hours ago, bolverk said:

The role we were playing for Ukraine was very much akin to the one France played for us versus the UK, minus the actual fighting alongside the Continental Army part.

the french made up 50% of the force on the ground at yorktown; we had no navy, but the french had 29 boats at the party and cut off the english attempt to relieve cornwallis

the frogs carried the day

also upthread re: the battle of britain, number of each bird used in the summer of '40:

1700+ hurricanes

300+ spitfires

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
Posted

Marco Rubio is still young. He will certainly be fired by Trump (likely within about 18 months) and he will be an irrelevancy. He got something he always wanted and it’s already visibly destroying him, he’ll live out the rest of his life feeling shame and utterly without dignity. There’s a small sense of pleasure I receive from that.

image.thumb.png.93dbd4591774cbb84b52541177b42188.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 4
Posted

The clip of Rubio on the senate floor from 2014 is making the rounds, talking about how Ukraine gave up nukes in exchange for the security promise from the Uk/us/russia… and how Russia attacked 20 yrs after. Not a great look. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

It makes no sense why we are surrendering to Russia. If you’re talking to friends, especially those on the right, make sure you use the term surrender to them.

im unsure that anyone can point to a historical event when the more powerful country capitulates to a much weaker one.

If we say it’s because of Russia’s nuclear arsenal that we have to give in, what happens next when they want Poland, Finland or the other nearby states to get out of nato? Do we just agree to it?

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)

I think allowing Russia to (further) undermine faith in our institutions or certainty about what is true fits with the strategy of ending the republic for good. 

The American oligarchs can use the Russians while blaming the Dems whom they have effectively labeled as socialists. That's enough for the voters. We may achieve maximum irony of "Trump is the only man who can protect us from the Russians!"

200w.gif?cid=6c09b952xi09f3u4xyhdmjezyk8

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Like 4
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I think allowing Russia to (further) undermine faith in our institutions or certain about what is true fits with the strategy of ending the republic for good. 

The American oligarchs can use the Russians while blaming the Dems who they have effectively labeled as socialists. That's enough for the voters. We may achieve maximum irony of "Trump is the only man who can protect us from the Russians!"

 

That’s already and has been the claim

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, bluto said:

The clip of Rubio on the senate floor from 2014 is making the rounds, talking about how Ukraine gave up nukes in exchange for the security promise from the Uk/us/russia… and how Russia attacked 20 yrs after. Not a great look. 

The same Marco Rubio who on film called Donald Trump a "con man."  And Trump's VP labeled Trump as "America's Hitler."  And Trump tweeted that Ukraine started the war, and a few days later questioned whether he said that.  I could go on.

Today's MAGA party doesn't care about what they may have said or done in the past, even if it's in direct contradiction to what they do or say today.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It makes no sense why we are surrendering to Russia. If you’re talking to friends, especially those on the right, make sure you use the term surrender to them.

im unsure that anyone can point to a historical event when the more powerful country capitulates to a much weaker one.

If we say it’s because of Russia’s nuclear arsenal that we have to give in, what happens next when they want Poland, Finland or the other nearby states to get out of nato? Do we just agree to it?

Wut?

There are plenty of times when the more powerful country capitulates. Mostly because the more powerful country decides it's not worth the effort to keep going. It's hardly worth the exercise there are so many documented instances of the more powerful country giving up their objectives. 

To be blunt, I think any country that is depending on US security assurances for their sovereignty should rethink things. Even if somehow in the future Trump goes away, the dynamics that created him getting to power in the first place haven't. Since WWII the elites in this country have seen the US foreign policy role as that of being the leader of the free world, with all the benefits that go along with it. Now isolationism is triumphant. There are no guarantees even if new leaders emerge in the future that try to restore whatever Trump and his allies are tearing down, that we won't go back to this mindset again in the future.  

And saying it's because of Russia's nuclear arsenal is a joke. This isn't a strategic or tactical maneuver. This is political. The truth is Trump and his allies are more aligned with Russia and their outlook than they are European nations. Trump wants to emulate Russia. Not punish them. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

This isn't a strategic or tactical maneuver. This is political. The truth is Trump and his allies are more aligned with Russia and their outlook than they are European nations. Trump wants to emulate Russia. Not punish them. 

This.  This shift is not a shift of "having re-evaluated our position in terms of security alliances and guarantees, we want to strike a better strategic balance, etc."  Instead, it is a complete 180 degree shift in allegiances.  We used to be friends with Europe, and enemies with Russia.  Now, our closest friend (maybe ONLY friend) is Russia, and we are enemies of Europe (no hyperbole there, Trump has openly stated that the EU is one of our enemies).

That's because the current regime -- and a large chunk of the country -- has decided that we'd rather be anti-democratic criminals than be the good guys.  The regime does so because it will personally enrich them and their pals, the voters do it because they're really, really, really, really fucking stupid.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Wut?

There are plenty of times when the more powerful country capitulates. Mostly because the more powerful country decides it's not worth the effort to keep going. It's hardly worth the exercise there are so many documented instances of the more powerful country giving up their objectives. 

To be blunt, I think any country that is depending on US security assurances for their sovereignty should rethink things. Even if somehow in the future Trump goes away, the dynamics that created him getting to power in the first place haven't. Since WWII the elites in this country have seen the US foreign policy role as that of being the leader of the free world, with all the benefits that go along with it. Now isolationism is triumphant. There are no guarantees even if new leaders emerge in the future that try to restore whatever Trump and his allies are tearing down, that we won't go back to this mindset again in the future.  

And saying it's because of Russia's nuclear arsenal is a joke. This isn't a strategic or tactical maneuver. This is political. The truth is Trump and his allies are more aligned with Russia and their outlook than they are European nations. Trump wants to emulate Russia. Not punish them. 

Trump likes Russia bc they helped him win and gave him a lot of $ over the years.

in his transactional smooth brain, they are his friends.

Europeans don’t bend the knee. They are enemies.

Thats the depth of his knowledge and understanding. 80 years of American policy mean nothing 

Edited by Dnaguy
  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
7 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Marco Rubio is still young. He will certainly be fired by Trump (likely within about 18 months) and he will be an irrelevancy. He got something he always wanted and it’s already visibly destroying him, he’ll live out the rest of his life feeling shame and utterly without dignity. There’s a small sense of pleasure I receive from that.

Yep, and knowing he was directed by Trump to say that the President deserves a Nobel Prize if the war ends is the cherry on top.

I don't know how people live with themselves. i guess the perks of being Secretary of State is pretty great.

Posted

europe laughs heartily at dotard's nobel lust

before it's all over, we should place a prop bet in vegas for his eventual exit 1) qualifying for and 2) actually winning the darwin award the year he exits

  • Like 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Trump likes Russia bc they helped him win and gave him a lot of $ over the years.

in his transactional smooth brain, they are his friends.

Europeans don’t bend the knee. They are enemies.

Thats the depth of his knowledge and understanding. 80 years of American policy mean nothing 

While the Republican Party is a cult of personality right now, there are people other than Trump who openly don't give a shit about any other country outside our borders. That was Vance's great lesson from his overseas deployments. Why are we over here? I don't care about any of these people. I don't care about Ukraine. Who gives a fuck what happens to them?

Frankly, that has been the American mindset since our founding. But after WWII we found ourselves as the most powerful country on Earth. I'd argue the most powerful country in human existence vis a vis the rest of the world. The leaders of both countries forged a bipartisan foreign policy that required all kinds of entanglements that the American people didn't understand and never really discussed. When it became a point of contention, it was always in favor of withdrawing from whatever conflict or involvement the US was up to. The one exception immediately following 9/11. But mostly it was foreign policy conducted without ever really asking the American people what they wanted. Because what they really want is to be left alone and not have any foreign entanglements. Not that that's possible or realistic, but when you're in complete ignorance, you're able to feel like that's the way to go.

The populist movement Trump is leading has leaned on Americans' intrinsic desire for isolationism. It was always a good call politically. Frankly, the ending of foreign aid of all types is going to play well back at home. One of the chief strengths of the US historically from a political perspective was our ability to defuse and isolate populist elements from obtaining power. I think of Williams Jennings Bryan, George Wallace, even Ross Perot. But Trump has succeeded where they failed. 

IMO we're in an era where populist movements are the only movements that will succeed. From either party. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

IMO we're in an era where populist movements are the only movements that will succeed. From either party. 

You mean aspiring oligarchies disguised as populist movements.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  This shift is not a shift of "having re-evaluated our position in terms of security alliances and guarantees, we want to strike a better strategic balance, etc."  Instead, it is a complete 180 degree shift in allegiances.  We used to be friends with Europe, and enemies with Russia.  Now, our closest friend (maybe ONLY friend) is Russia, and we are enemies of Europe (no hyperbole there, Trump has openly stated that the EU is one of our enemies).

We've always been at war with Eurasia

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, South Austin said:

You mean aspiring oligarchies disguised as populist movements.

Populist movements are always dystopias from my point of view. Whether on the right or the left they prey on our fears, inherent sense of superiority, relishing in victimhood, and an intense desire to seek reprisal for perceived wrongs. Plenty of populist movements sacked the oligarchs and then moved into the farmhouse themselves. "Everyone is equal. We're just a little equaler." This one is putting the oligarchs in control, while systematically dismantling any ability to provide checks and balances to power. But they had to appeal to enough voters in the first place. They did that through a campaign of populism. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
8 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Populist movements are always dystopias from my point of view. Whether on the right or the left they prey on our fears, inherent sense of superiority, relishing in victimhood, and an intense desire to seek reprisal for perceived wrongs. Plenty of populist movements sacked the oligarchs and then moved into the farmhouse themselves. "Everyone is equal. We're just a little equaler." This one is putting the oligarchs in control, while systematically dismantling any ability to provide checks and balances to power. But they had to appeal to enough voters in the first place. They did that through a campaign of populist lies.

Fify

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Willfully Horn said:

Fify

I guess once again I'd say populist movements are always filled with lies. They're a means to power. There is nothing unusual in this case. What's unusual is that one of the dominant parties allowed this to pass - many Republicans even encouraged the takeover in many ways - and then the voters voted for it. That hasn't happened before. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, WBT said:

We've always been at war with Eurasia

We should have been at war with Europe.  They were God awful, and I can't believe decades later I still have to hear Final Countdown at sporting events.  Fuck Europe.

spacer.png

  • Haha 1
Posted

Z taking the high road, no doubt in concert with counsel taken this weekend

imho it feels like the king, macron, starmer & merz are building a firewall around madman

Z's UK exit presser only in ukranian validates the "cards" lost-in-translation idea - he will not be ambushed again

collectively, europe will run circles around dotard's dipshits - it's not even close to an even contest:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/02/zelenskyy-offers-no-apology-to-trump-as-he-says-row-brought-nothing-positive?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

 

this is not about Z but is important to the real politik as events unfold:

https://theconversation.com/germanys-chancellor-in-waiting-prioritizes-real-independence-from-the-us-but-what-does-that-mean-and-is-it-achievable-250708

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 hour ago, South Austin said:

We should have been at war with Europe.  They were God awful, and I can't believe decades later I still have to hear Final Countdown at sporting events.  Fuck Europe.

spacer.png

Were these guys Hans' muscle in Die Hard? Def second from left.

Posted
41 minutes ago, jeevsie said:

Were these guys Hans' muscle in Die Hard? Def second from left.

 

As it happens, Elizabeth Montgomery probably had an affair with actor/dancer Alexander Godunov, who played Karl in Die Hard.

Posted

Moving my reply to the appropriate thread....

4 minutes ago, Bevo said:

I don’t think this is true, but most of the left thinks that it is true. The right is not some singular voice of thought. There are plenty on the right who are slava Ukraine. We will see if that has an effect on Trump, but I doubt it because Trump is hardheaded and always thinks that he is right and is narcissistic enough not to change his views and thus admit that he was wrong. And his supporters may still support him because their reasons for support probably weren’t tied to his position on Ukraine.

What the hell are you talking about? Do a surlysearch for "trump derangement syndrome" and find the multitudes of MAGAS that call surly home slinging it to rebut every (now validated) fear. 

And the right may not be singular in thought, but it is absolutely singular in voice. Once the popular narrative is out, it is blasting across every frequency, platform, blog, channel, and propagandist. 

The republicans MADE trans rights a voting issue when the democrats weren't campaigning on it. They did it through having a singular voice of thought.

 

You and I seem to be living in very different realities.

  • Hook 'Em 3


×
×
  • Create New...