Trump is not offering peace in Ukraine

[Alexis Jacobi]

If by huge shift you mean that Trump has further increased support for Israel then yeah.

I was at one time quite Zionist. And now I am really more anti-Zionist. Myself, I am not favorable to Trump’s Zionism. And presently, unless you go to the real fringes, most of MAGA is blindly — religiously — pro-Israel.

My position on the campus “crackdown” is complex. First, it is insanely counter free-speech. But I am no fan of Islam nor the foothold they are gaining in Europe and a lesser extent the US. But I sympathize tremendously with Palestinians.

I have a sense (Meersheimer talks about this) that the State of Israel is in deep deep trouble.

You will naturally misunderstand why I suggest recognizing the opinions of, say, Fuentes, but I do suggest people become aware of the dramatically shifting opinion landscape vis-a-vis Israel and Zionist political power outside of Israel.

[Atla]

There is no Trumpism. What there is is a weariness among Americans and an understanding the 4th Box is very close and unlocked. Americans really don't want to open that box, not here in the states or over there. So, we're desperately tryin' to get a handle on things. RED MAN DEFIANT is part of that effort. And, as I say, the only way he fails is if he deviates from puttin' American interests, as defined by Americans, first.

Well the clear majority of Americans support Ukraine over Russia, Trump should have paid attention to them.

The immigrants most certainly do.

You make them sound like infiltrators with a shared purpose.

No, Europe is raising up, quite willingly, a generation of New Men who aren't European.

Not even wrong. Europe was/is naive when it tried multiculturalism, and was/is extremely naive with Islam. But to say that they are willingly raising non-Europeans is nonsense.

You're not wrong. The U.S. State, as I posted earlier, is very much the bad guy in multiple ways, across multiple fronts. Americans recognize this (finally!).

Anyway, I've said my piece and gotten the reception I expected, so let me close with this...

Consider the possibility the State (in any iteration) is not synonymous with the nation and that its interests (which it holds to be the nation's) are not synonymous with the nation's.

Consider that two wrongs don't make a right. Trying to use Trump to get rid of the Western establishment is like pouring oil on fire.

[henry quirk]

Why do you see 3rd world "interests" as antithetical to culture and civilization?

American interests (and European interests) don't jibe with, for example, Middle Eastern interests (not strictly considered 3rd World, I know).

Haven't Achebe. Naipal, ishiguru, and Rushdie (and others) benefited English literature, and Western culture?

Debatable.

Who wants a stagnant world, lacking new influences and immigrant energy and innovation?

Well, there's the controlled influx of folks who can actually contribute, and there's what's goin'' on now which is an indiscriminate flow of folks who don't or can't contribute (economically or culturally). These folks dominate rather than assimilate.

Try something else.

Not much choice in that. The U.S. and European States chose poorly and really all that's left is sumthin' else. No matter what, though, Ukraine is dead (it's State, I mean, the nation will continue). As I ask up-thread: will it die with or without atomic mushrooms sproutin' up?

[phyllo]

America has stood alone since its inception. America has been hated since its inception (and not for the reasons you think).

Not so.

American colonists hoped for possible French aid in their struggle against British forces. The Continental Congress established the Secret Committee of Correspondence to publicize the American cause in Europe. Committee member Benjamin Franklin wrote to contacts in France with encouraging accounts of colonial resistance. The French had suffered a defeat by the British during the Seven Years’ War and had lost North American territory under the 1763 Treaty of Paris. As the French and the British continued to vie for power in the 1770s, French officials saw an opportunity in the rebellion of Britain’s North American colonies to take advantage of British troubles. Through secret agents, the French Government began to provide clandestine assistance to the United States, much of which they channeled through American trader Silas Deane.

As the members of the Continental Congress considered declaring independence, they also discussed the possibility and necessity of foreign alliances, and assigned a committee to draft a Model Treaty to serve as guide for this work. After Congress formally declared independence from Great Britain in 1776, it dispatched a group of several commissioners led by Benjamin Franklin to negotiate an alliance with France. When news of the Declaration of Independence and the subsequent British evacuation of Boston reached France, French Foreign Minister Comte de Vergennes decided in favor of an alliance. However, once news of General George Washington’s defeats in New York reached Europe in August of 1776, Vergennes wavered, questioning the wisdom of committing to a full alliance.

Benjamin Franklin’s popularity in France bolstered French support for the American cause. The French public viewed Franklin as a representative of republican simplicity and honesty, an image Franklin cultivated. A rage for all things Franklin and American swept France, assisting American diplomats and Vergennes in pushing for an alliance. In the meantime, Vergennes agreed to provide the United States with a secret loan.

Despite the loan and discussions of a full alliance, French assistance to the new United States was limited at the outset. Throughout 1777, Vergennes delayed as he conducted negotiations with the Spanish Government, which was wary of U.S. independence and also wanted assurances that Spain would regain territories if it went to war against the British.

Vergennes finally decided in favor of an alliance when news of the British surrender at the Battle of Saratoga reached him in December 1777. Vergennes, having heard rumors of secret British peace offers to Franklin, decided not to wait for Spanish support and offered the United States an official French alliance. On February 6, 1778, Benjamin Franklin and the other two commissioners, Arthur Lee and Silas Deane, signed a Treaty of Alliance and a Treaty of Amity and Commerce with France. The Treaty of Alliance contained the provisions the U.S. commissioners had originally requested, but also included a clause forbidding either country to make a separate peace with Britain, as well as a secret clause allowing for Spain, or other European powers, to enter into the alliance. Spain officially entered the war on June 21, 1779. The Treaty of Amity and Commerce promoted trade between the United States and France and recognized the United States as an independent nation.

Between 1778 and 1782 the French provided supplies, arms and ammunition, uniforms, and, most importantly, troops and naval support to the beleaguered Continental Army. The French navy transported reinforcements, fought off a British fleet, and protected Washington’s forces in Virginia. French assistance was crucial in securing the British surrender at Yorktown in 1781.

With the consent of Vergennes, U.S. commissioners entered negotiations with Britain to end the war, and reached a preliminary agreement in 1782. Franklin informed Vergennes of the agreement and also asked for an additional loan. Vergennes did lodge a complaint on this instance, but also granted the requested loan despite French financial troubles. Vergennes and Franklin successfully presented a united front despite British attempts to drive a wedge between the allies during their separate peace negotiations. The United States, Spain, and France formally ended the war with Britain with the Treaty of Paris in 1783.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/17 ... h-alliance

[henry quirk]

the influence of political theorists of the Right who were rarely studied but whose ideas over 12-15 years have filtered into the discourse of present. (Bannon for example as one who has read Evola, Guénon, Coomeraswamy, Jean Raspail, etc., etc.)

Fair enough. You do understand, though, a great many Americans are not married to Right & Left distinctions, yes? Theirs is an American sensibility which I've described in-forum as distinctly libertarian (lower case, non-political, non-ideological), a mind your own business, keep your hands to yourself...or else frame of mind.

Do you pound sand?

I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to. -J. R. "Bob" Dobbs

[henry quirk]

Also it was the US-Israel that was most responsible for the recent migration crisis —your Republicans in particular.

Atla’s got a point. There is however a huge shift in the “support for Israel” line.

The Christian Evangelical Right, etc.

Tough conversation to delve into however, given the potential ramifications of too accurate speech in today’s climate.

Which is a shame. It's not anti-Semitic to say damn, guys, leave us out of it! It's not anti-Semitic to say we're allies, sure, but we won't foot your bill forever. It's not anti-Semitic to say we respect you but we aren't you.

[attofishpi]

Also it was the US-Israel that was most responsible for the recent migration crisis —your Republicans in particular.

Atla’s got a point.

He might have a point but it's wrong. The migration crisis is an ongoing mess within Europe due to daft EU policies of allowing all n sundry into their borders (economic migrants under the guise of 'asylum seeking'). Putin and his buddy Assad also caused a large populous shift from Syria.

[Alexiev]

Why do you see 3rd world "interests" as antithetical to culture and civilization?

American interests (and European interests) don't jibe with, for example, Middle Eastern interests (not strictly considered 3rd World, I know).

Haven't Achebe. Naipal, ishiguru, and Rushdie (and others) benefited English literature, and Western culture?

Debatable.

Who wants a stagnant world, lacking new influences and immigrant energy and innovation?

Well, there's the controlled influx of folks who can actually contribute, and there's what's goin'' on now which is an indiscriminate flow of folks who don't or can't contribute (economically or culturally). These folks dominate rather than assimilate.

Try something else.

Not much choice in that. The U.S. and European States chose poorly and really all that's left is sumthin' else. No matter what, though, Ukraine is dead (it's State, I mean, the nation will continue). As I ask up-thread: will it die with or without atomic mushrooms sproutin' up?

In the "debate" about the value of immigrants authors the Nobel committee (and 98% of educated readers) agree with me.

Middle Eastern interests don't necessarily coincide with the interests of ex-pats.

I don't buy that immigrants to the U.S. want to "dominate". Where do you get that from? There are some immigrants who do -- just as there are some natural citizens who do.

Finally, in any war it seems reasonable to have a goal about the conclusion. Spending billions and still losing doesn't seem a reasonable goal. Some sort of settlement involving Ukraine ceding territory seems the likely solution. Giving up would embolden Russia, and any invasion of the Baltics (who are NATO members) would be terrible.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Finally, in any war it seems reasonable to have a goal about the conclusion. Spending billions and still losing doesn't seem a reasonable goal. Some sort of settlement involving Ukraine ceding territory seems the likely solution. Giving up would embolden Russia, and any invasion of the Baltics (who are NATO members) would be terrible.

The US lost its gambit in Ukraine. It precipitated a terrible situation, fucked things up incredibly (cynically) and can do little else now but retreat. Neither the US nor Ukraine has many “cards”.

If an agreement is reached now, Europe can spend the next decade working to inhibit Russia’s plans, whatever they may be. All if Europe can turn against Russia. Fo no business with Russia. Do all sort of harm to Russia and its interests.

There are dozens of ways to not “give up”. However, the areas that were conquered may (as I have read) feel more affiliation with Russia. (I am unsure about this).

They really but really screwed ip Ukraine.

This interview with 2 Ukrainian girls was quite moving. Especially the deep emotions of the girl on the left.

[Impenitent]

maybe Trump can build housing in Ukraine like he wants to do in Gaza....

-Imp

[phyllo]

Ukraine shouldn't have given away its nukes.

They got conned by US, UK and Russia.

[Dubious]

You (k)now f(uck) all about Europe that's for sure.

And you, like most here, don't know jack shit about Americans.

...only that the half of them, Trump voters mostly, are the biggest dumbfucks on the planet...which even a lot of Americans agree with.

[Alexiev]

maybe Trump can build housing in Ukraine like he wants to do in Gaza....

-Imp

Some Trump-owned Black Sea beach resorts could be nice! Didn't Chekov'sThe Lady with the Dog enjoy the scene?

[Alexis Jacobi]

…

Might interest you.

[Alexiev]

…

Might interest you.

I watched about 5 minutes. I agree that identity politics are silly and counter productive. But civil war is unlikely. In my youth, America was far closer to civil war than it is now, and far more divided than it is now. Also, the "identity politics" in the time of our actual civil war were far more dramatic.

Cultural diversity promotes creativity and change. I was in Toronto on business 20 or so years ago on the day Quebec almost voted to cecede. Driving my airport cab driver was a Pakistani immigrant. "Ah, it is the weeping time for the Canada," he told me. Could a native Englush speaker have been more eloquent? The francophones were worried that their language would evolve and become corrupt. So what? Why is that a bad thing? Why do we want to preserve Western culture unchanged? Perhaps foreign influences can be positive.