Big C said:

---

It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of foreign powers are a bit discombobulated by what they perceive as Trump's strength and unpredictability ("Whoa, that dude's a little crazy!"). Maybe the two administrations were able to play good cop / bad cop with some success. Hey, whatever works. Kudos to both.

I'm not sure, however, that that is an effective long-term strategy for Trump 47, nor is it likely to work against China and, especially, Russia (since Putin knows quite well that he owns Trump).


Gotta love China's President Xi. Has he mastered that benign/benevolent facial expression, or what? The guy scares me a lot more than Putin, who at least has his cards on the table. WTH are we gonna do if China finally makes the big play for Taiwan? You know, the Taiwan with the awesome microchips*.



* totally digressing here, but whatever happened to Intel? HTH do you go from world's best microprocessors, to being forced to suck around hoping to become government subsidized, in order to save your azz?

---

Why did Putin invade Ukraine when Biden was president? Why not do it with Trump at the helm, since "Putin owns Trump."

BearGoggles said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

bearister said:

---

I hope it works out…but excuse me if I distrust any deal brokered by an Administration that saw fit to nominate Mike Huckabee as Ambassador to Israel:

Picking Mike Huckabee for ambassador to Israel spells more misery for Palestinians - Arkansas Times


https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2024/11/14/picking-mike-huckabee-for-ambassador-to-israel-spells-more-misery-for-palestinians

---

So does Trump get credit/blame or not? Was Trump indispensable (as per lots of reports) or was it all Biden? You and the other liberals need to pick one claim and stick with it.

And do you know who has created misery for Palestinians? Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. The Palestinians will have continued misery (and not a state) as long as Hams is empowered. Biden never figured that out. Trump and his team already have.

If you really cared about the Palestinians, Mike Huckabee would be somewhere around number 50 on the priority list of things to be concerned about. But there you go again with TDS.

---

No one cares about the Palestinians, goggles. I think Noam Chomsky said it best (paraphrasing), "no one cares about the plight of the Palestinians because they do not have enough money for anyone to care".

Trump will greenlight settlements in Gaza and that will be that. Palestinians will always be a diaspora, getting kicked out of Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Chile, the US. He may even put a hotel down on the coast. Trump does not care about the Palestinians, Goggles. To even suggest that he wants to end this conflict out of sympathy, empathy or even to have a greater understanding of Middle East dynamics is ridiculous. Its pure ego and his relationship with Bibi. Get real.

---

I never said Biden or Trump care about the Palestinians. My point was Bearister doesn't care about them either. Because if he did, he would be calling for the removal of Hamas. Instead he's posting about an ambassador who hasn't even taken office yet.

LMAO re "settlements in Gaza." Care to bet about that.

Question - why do the Palestinians keep getting kicked out of countries (according to you)? What explanation can you offer?

---

You miss my point. Biden, Trump, Bearister, the UN - it doesn't matter. What matters is that because they offer no political capital and no meaningful currency to push the US for a solution, nothing will change. And, I think historically, especially from 1967 (6-day war), Arab states have talked tough that Palestinians should be granted statehood. But, in reality, I think its something that they oppose. Palestinians are not liked in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon or Egypt.

As it relates to Gaza, how would that area be rebuilt? Would Trump or Netanyahu want a say in how its rebuilt and who enters and occupies this area? Do they want a repeat of October 7th? This area, like others, will have any "autonomy" gradually stripped.

The explanation I can offer I think, again, stems from the 6-day war and other events. The Shatila Massacre in the Palestinian refugeee camp by Lebanese forces in 1982; the PLO's effort to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy in 1970. More recently Hamas' embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood which Egypt despises. Many factors but I think they all stem from Palestinians as refugees pose risks to each Arab country that takes them in because they try and take political control/autonomy in those areas like they did in Southern Lebanon. That led to the 1982 invasion by Israel. Its the same reason why Egypt wouldn't take in Palestinian refugees despite all the horrors in Gaza.

And Kuwait. They were booted from Kuwait, too.

It is purely a guess but I'm betting there are behind the scenes assurances being made about Hamas.

sycasey said:

---

My guess is that part of the reason Netanyahu is more amenable to a ceasefire now is that he knows there is a new US government coming in who won't raise objections to further Israeli expansion into the West Bank. There's no longer a need for the war to provide him with political cover.

---

Wrong. This takes reflects your own political sensitivities, not Israel's. And it was already Trump's policy from 2019/20 to generally support (or at least tolerate) expansion of settlements.

Trump really pressured Netanyahu to accept the settlement. Netanyahu acceded to Trump's wishes not because of settlements, but because of Iran and to a lesser extent Syria/Lebanon. Netanyahu wants Trump on his side when it comes to confronting Iran.

My sense is Trump wants to build an international coalition against Iran which would include many Middle East countries. And of course Bibi wants that. Much harder to do that if there's a war in Gaza.

oski003 said:

---

Why did Putin invade Ukraine when Biden was president? Why not do it with Trump at the helm, since "Putin owns Trump."

---

"Putin wanted to undermine the NATO alliance, and Trump undermined the NATO alliance. Putin wanted to weaken the E.U., and Trump made little effort to express his disdain for the E.U. Putin wanted to weaken the U.S. political system, and Trump was unnervingly aggressive in trying to weaken the U.S. political system.

Putin wanted to hurt Ukraine, and Trump launched an extortion scheme that threatened to hurt Ukraine.

Why didn't the Russian leader deploy troops into Ukraine during Trump's term? Perhaps because Putin was so pleased with an American president who pursued goals in line with Moscow's agenda.

Had Putin launched an invasion, it risked upsetting the course he was already delighted to see. Why would the Russian leader get in the way of the progress Trump was already delivering?"
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/putin-didnt-invade-ukraine-last-us-administration-rcna17147

" Far from deterring Putin, Trump did the opposite. Thanks to Trump, Putin was able to take advantage of a period of apparent detente during which Trump actually pursued Putin's own policies of weakening NATO and democracy and destabilizing the West leaving Putin free to prepare his war against the free people of Ukraine and their democratically elected government."

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/03/02/putin-invade-ukraine-trump-00012897

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

My guess is that part of the reason Netanyahu is more amenable to a ceasefire now is that he knows there is a new US government coming in who won't raise objections to further Israeli expansion into the West Bank. There's no longer a need for the war to provide him with political cover.

---

Wrong. This takes reflects your own political sensitivities, not Israel's. And it was already Trump's policy from 2019/20 to generally support (or at least tolerate) expansion of settlements.

Trump really pressured Netanyahu to accept the settlement. Netanyahu acceded to Trump's wishes not because of settlements, but because of Iran and to a lesser extent Syria/Lebanon. Netanyahu wants Trump on his side when it comes to confronting Iran.

My sense is Trump wants to build an international coalition against Iran which would include many Middle East countries. And of course Bibi wants that. Much harder to do that if there's a war in Gaza.

---

I hope I am wrong about the West Bank! We'll see if the settlements continue there or not. I have a hard time seeing Trump stopping it, but if he does I will give credit.

Do you think the TDS shield is sturdy enough for the next 4 years, or more?

How did you like that sweet 68 he carded? Was that hyperbole or simple trolling?


*Is it going to be a problem that the Ruling Techno-Oligarchs may not be sufficiently anti vax (although they are still willing to disseminate misinformation on their platforms for clicks)?

Zipper aren't you ever going to email Nicolas Hulscher and Peter McCullough for making you look bad with their bs myo/peri autopsy study?? lmao

Ah the boogeymen of Ukraine. Victoria Nuland. Hunter Biden. Joe Biden. There's no bad guy on the Russian side. Just rumors, innuendo, Tulsi.

Let me know what Nick and Pete say. hey are you going to the inauguration? Got your winters and thermals? Or are you a snowflake like the rest of you lot?

Jake Sullivan's "catastrophic" AI warning for Trump and America


https://www.axios.com/2025/01/18/biden-sullivan-ai-race-trump-china

"Jake Sullivan with three days left as White House national security adviser, with wide access to the world's secrets called us to deliver a chilling, "catastrophic" warning for America and the incoming administration:

The next few years will determine whether artificial intelligence leads to catastrophe and whether China or America prevails in the AI arms race.
Why it matters: Sullivan said in our phone interview that unlike previous dramatic technology advancements (atomic weapons, space, the internet), AI development sits outside of government and security clearances, and in the hands of private companies with the power of nation-states.

Underscoring the gravity of his message, Sullivan spoke with an urgency and directness that were rarely heard during his decade-plus in public life.

Somehow, government will have to join forces with these companies to nurture and protect America's early AI edge, and shape the global rules for using potentially God-like powers, he says.

U.S. failure to get this right, Sullivan warns, could be "dramatic, and dramatically negative to include the democratization of extremely powerful and lethal weapons; massive disruption and dislocation of jobs; an avalanche of misinformation."

Staying ahead in the AI arms race makes the Manhattan Project during World War II seem tiny, and conventional national security debates small. It's potentially existential with implications for every nation and company.

To distill Sullivan: America must quickly perfect a technology that many believe will be smarter and more capable than humans. We need to do this without decimating U.S. jobs, and inadvertently unleashing something with capabilities we didn't anticipate or prepare for. We need to both beat China on the technology and in shaping and setting global usage and monitoring of it, so bad actors don't use it catastrophically. Oh, and it can only be done with unprecedented government-private sector collaboration and probably difficult, but vital, cooperation with China.

"There's going to have to be a new model of relationship because of just the sheer capability in the hands of a private actor," Sullivan says."

Anarchistbear said:

---

movielover said:

---

Hasn't Israel wanted us to bomb Iran?

Folks have claimed Israel had a plan for us to start 7 wars in 5 years, and the only war yet to start was Iran?

(Israel has a full time minder for every US Congress person.)

---

You get what you pay for.

This is the same deal on the table for months. There was no reason for Bibi to accept it because Biden gave him unconditional support for his atrocities. Trump didn't want a foreign policy crisis to mar his inauguration, so Bibi complied. I suspect we'll return to the killing fields before long.

---

I'm not sure that this was the "deal" on the table for months. I don't believe it was.

But in any event, what you're ignoring is that Hamas has not accepted this deal previously. Why would you not mention that and instead focus only on Bibi/Israel.

movielover said:

---

Hasn't Israel wanted us to bomb Iran?

Folks have claimed Israel had a plan for us to start 7 wars in 5 years, and the only war yet to start was Iran?

(Israel has a full time minder for every US Congress person.)

---

This is weird borderline antisemetic. Who are these "folks"? Are you suggesting Israel controls US foreign policy? The "full time minder" concept is just bizarre. Remarkable that 3 people here starred this post.

To answer your question, both the US and Israel have wanted to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That is the only reason to consider bombing Iran. And should that become necessary, Israel doesn't need US assistance to bomb Iran. What it does need is the heavy bunker busting ordnance

And for the record, Israel could bomb Iran today if it wanted to.

Final questions. Who started the current war in Gaza? Is that one of the 7 wars you're counting?

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

My guess is that part of the reason Netanyahu is more amenable to a ceasefire now is that he knows there is a new US government coming in who won't raise objections to further Israeli expansion into the West Bank. There's no longer a need for the war to provide him with political cover.

---

Wrong. This takes reflects your own political sensitivities, not Israel's. And it was already Trump's policy from 2019/20 to generally support (or at least tolerate) expansion of settlements.

Trump really pressured Netanyahu to accept the settlement. Netanyahu acceded to Trump's wishes not because of settlements, but because of Iran and to a lesser extent Syria/Lebanon. Netanyahu wants Trump on his side when it comes to confronting Iran.

My sense is Trump wants to build an international coalition against Iran which would include many Middle East countries. And of course Bibi wants that. Much harder to do that if there's a war in Gaza.

---

I hope I am wrong about the West Bank! We'll see if the settlements continue there or not. I have a hard time seeing Trump stopping it, but if he does I will give credit.

---

You're missing the point. Trump's announced policy since 2019/20 was to support (or at least tolerate) settlement expansion in the West Bank. That was not tied to the current Gaza deal. If expansion of settlements continues and Trump does not intervene (he probably won't), it will not be evidence that was a trade off for Bibi agreeing to the Gaza plan. You're analysis is completely twisted on this issue because of your bias.

BearGoggles said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

movielover said:

---

Hasn't Israel wanted us to bomb Iran?

Folks have claimed Israel had a plan for us to start 7 wars in 5 years, and the only war yet to start was Iran?

(Israel has a full time minder for every US Congress person.)

---

You get what you pay for.

This is the same deal on the table for months. There was no reason for Bibi to accept it because Biden gave him unconditional support for his atrocities. Trump didn't want a foreign policy crisis to mar his inauguration, so Bibi complied. I suspect we'll return to the killing fields before long.

---

I'm not sure that this was the "deal" on the table for months. I don't believe it was.

But in any event, what you're ignoring is that Hamas has not accepted this deal previously. Why would you not mention that and instead focus only on Bibi/Israel.

---

Because America / Israel / Jews = bad; Palestinians / Hamas / Iran / Arabs / Hezbollah = good

BearGoggles said:

---

movielover said:

---

Hasn't Israel wanted us to bomb Iran?

Folks have claimed Israel had a plan for us to start 7 wars in 5 years, and the only war yet to start was Iran?

(Israel has a full time minder for every US Congress person.)

---

This is weird borderline antisemetic. Who are these "folks"? Are you suggesting Israel controls US foreign policy? The "full time minder" concept is just bizarre. Remarkable that 3 people here starred this post.

To answer your question, both the US and Israel have wanted to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That is the only reason to consider bombing Iran. And should that become necessary, Israel doesn't need US assistance to bomb Iran. What it does need is the heavy bunker busting ordnance

And for the record, Israel could bomb Iran today if it wanted to.

Final questions. Who started the current war in Gaza? Is that one of the 7 wars you're counting?

---

1 Maybe not that borderline
2 It isn't the only reason. Putting a halt to Iran's support of regional terrorism is another reason.
3 Except that the war mongering genocide loving US doesn't allow it.
4 That doesn't count because Israel's 70 years of genocide in Palestine was the real beginning of the war; and besides, Israel and those invader Jews had it coming

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

My guess is that part of the reason Netanyahu is more amenable to a ceasefire now is that he knows there is a new US government coming in who won't raise objections to further Israeli expansion into the West Bank. There's no longer a need for the war to provide him with political cover.

---

Wrong. This takes reflects your own political sensitivities, not Israel's. And it was already Trump's policy from 2019/20 to generally support (or at least tolerate) expansion of settlements.

Trump really pressured Netanyahu to accept the settlement. Netanyahu acceded to Trump's wishes not because of settlements, but because of Iran and to a lesser extent Syria/Lebanon. Netanyahu wants Trump on his side when it comes to confronting Iran.

My sense is Trump wants to build an international coalition against Iran which would include many Middle East countries. And of course Bibi wants that. Much harder to do that if there's a war in Gaza.

---

I hope I am wrong about the West Bank! We'll see if the settlements continue there or not. I have a hard time seeing Trump stopping it, but if he does I will give credit.

---

You're missing the point. Trump's announced policy since 2019/20 was to support (or at least tolerate) settlement expansion in the West Bank. That was not tied to the current Gaza deal. If expansion of settlements continues and Trump does not intervene (he probably won't), it will not be evidence that was a trade off for Bibi agreeing to the Gaza plan. You're analysis is completely twisted on this issue because of your bias.

---

My theory is that Bibi is more willing to give in to Trump because Trump will let him do what he wants in other matters (like settlements). This would actually seem to support that theory.

Less than 24 hours left.

movielover said:

---

Tip O'Neil lied, and welched on his promise to reduce spending growth.

---

And it was easier for the parties to be cordial because Congressional power was eternally in Ds hands up through Gingrich in 1994.