Politics

[Datchew]

The real shame is on the administrators in power with their “what have you done for me lately” attitudes trying to bill Ukraine for the pleasure of territorial concessions.

I agree this is a shame. But do you view it as a new and novel approach that's not consistent with American foreign policy for several decades?

 

[spike.t]

Spike, I'm not dense. I'm not a loyalist. I'm not blinded by anyone's pretty words. I view media from every major outlet and then some. All of this stuff was being reported here and being called out as a potential mistake on Trump's part as it pertains to Canada and elsewhere. Should he have played all of this differently? Yes. Have there been major backtracks, stupid statements, ass covering and head scratching decisions made since all this started? Of course. Any of us without rose colored glasses can see it and plenty of talking heads here were warning of it and the backlash in Canada.

That does not mean that as a Canadian or anyone else, you should slice your own throat just because you believe Trump is trying to slice your leg.

Never said you were......but start fkn around with peoples nationalism/ patriotism...etc it won't go well.... as an American you should know that more than most....as said I have observed in the previous election a certain big issue that to me was going to be a big problem for the republicans...people I talk to on here from USA when I raised it said no not a big issue as it's governed by individual states....well I was kinda proved bit correct in my outlook on the situation......just saying distance and no involvement can make things look different to when you live in the place....

 

[spike.t]

I think my grasp is just fine. You're leaving out the promises of not expanding NATO which seems a key piece of starting the whole path to the invasion moving. We've covered this ground before.

I'm curious on you saying "your invasion" and "your word." Are you associating me with the Russians?
That's quite a bizarre accusation if that's what you're getting at.

For the umpteenth time there was no agreement for nato not to expand.......
And yeah you do sound like a Russian..just saying....

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

I agree this is a shame. But do you view it as a new and novel approach that's not consistent with American foreign policy for several decades?

No I view it as a new and novel approach of double billing, Ukraine paid upfront by handing over their nuclear deterrent and the current administration is attempting to squeeze another payment from them.

 

[Datchew]

No I view it as a new and novel approach of double billing, Ukraine paid upfront by handing over their nuclear deterrent and the current administration is attempting to squeeze another payment from them.

I can get behind that viewpoint. Appreciate you clarifying.

 

[Datchew]

For the umpteenth time there was no agreement for nato not to expand.......
And yeah you do sound like a Russian..just saying....

I'm a Kansas boy, 5 years navy spec war veteran, secret and sometimes top secret clearance, mechanical engineer by career post-military, and live in San Antonio, Texas.

While I do speak functional Spanish (often enhanced when tequila is involved... purely from the speaker's perspective) I'm quite sure I am not Russian. Feel free to drop in anytime you're in Texas and I'll host and you can be the judge.

On that promise about Nato expansion - I recommend you go search for this phrase "declassified NATO Baker not one inch Eastward."

Peruse multiple links. You never know how many the Russkies have put up as a front to spread lies and disinformation.

 

[John Wasmuth]

 

[spike.t]

I'm a Kansas boy, 5 years navy spec war veteran, secret and sometimes top secret clearance, mechanical engineer by career post-military, and live in San Antonio, Texas.

While I do speak functional Spanish (often enhanced when tequila is involved... purely from the speaker's perspective) I'm quite sure I am not Russian. Feel free to drop in anytime you're in Texas and I'll host and you can be the judge.

On that promise about Nato expansion - I recommend you go search for this phrase "declassified NATO Baker not one inch Eastward."

Peruse multiple links. You never know how many the Russkies have put up as a front to spread lies and disinformation.

On the Russian bit I was ...but on expansion........

 

[Datchew]

On the Russian bit I was ...but on expansion........

You didn't find anything like this?

Link to declassified docs

 

[RLD]

I think my grasp is just fine. You're leaving out the promises of not expanding NATO which seems a key piece of starting the whole path to the invasion moving. We've covered this ground before.

I'm curious on you saying "your invasion" and "your word." Are you associating me with the Russians?
That's quite a bizarre accusation if that's what you're getting at.

The Budapest memorandum was where Russia guaranteed in writing to respect the borders of Ukraine.

Tell me, what document or agreement was it again where who exactly promised not to expand NATO?

There isn't one and the alleged verbal promise probably did not happen:

“I was in those meetings, and Gorbachev has [also] said there was no promise not to enlarge NATO,” Zoellick recalls. Soviet Foreign Minister, Eduard Shevardnadze, later president of Georgia, concurred, he says. Nor does the treaty on Germany’s unification include a limit on NATO enlargement. Those facts have undermined one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s justifications for invading Ukraine — that the United States had agreed that former Warsaw Pact nations would never become part of the North Atlantic security alliance."

Now, if there was a verbal promise made in 1990 it was only that NATO would not expand to the former GDR (which ship of course had long sailed by the time Putin went into Ukraine).

Further Yeltsin explicitly approved of the expansion of NATO into Poland, long after any such verbal promise may have been made. That resulted in the now near dead NATO-Russia Founding Act which also does not prohibit NATO expansion.

The Russian talk of the "broken promise" is as much of a pretext for the invasion of Ukraine as many other spurious Putin claims.

 

[spike.t]

You didn't find anything like this?

Link to declassified docs

It's 22.59 on a Friday night in lusaka....beer time.... no time to Peruse such ....... .....but will go with the above post

 

[Datchew]

The Budapest memorandum was where Russia guaranteed in writing to respect the borders of Ukraine.

Tell me, what document or agreement was it again where who exactly promised not to expand NATO?

There isn't one and the alleged verbal promise probably did not happen:

“I was in those meetings, and Gorbachev has [also] said there was no promise not to enlarge NATO,” Zoellick recalls. Soviet Foreign Minister, Eduard Shevardnadze, later president of Georgia, concurred, he says. Nor does the treaty on Germany’s unification include a limit on NATO enlargement. Those facts have undermined one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s justifications for invading Ukraine — that the United States had agreed that former Warsaw Pact nations would never become part of the North Atlantic security alliance."

Now, if there was a verbal promise made in 1990 it was only that NATO would not expand to the former GDR (which ship of course had long sailed by the time Putin went into Ukraine).

Further Yeltsin explicitly approved of the expansion of NATO into Poland, long after any such verbal promise may have been made. That resulted in the now near dead NATO-Russia Founding Act which also does not prohibit NATO expansion.

The Russian talk of the "broken promise" is as much of a pretext for the invasion of Ukraine as many other spurious Putin claims.

you posted this directly below the link to the declassified docs. More irony.

I've heard the argument about it being a spoken promise but that it doesn't really count if it didn't end up in the final document. Sounded like BS the first time I heard it and still does.

I don't think Poland is relevant. Putin invaded Ukraine, not Poland.
I'm not excusing, justifying, or condoning it but it's pretty straightforward to see that Russia would see a coup that would cut off their seaport as a threat they couldn't back away from. While he may be a slippery character it seems like this is one of the things he pointed out in his justifications.

 

[spike.t]

you posted this directly below the link to the declassified docs. More irony.

I've heard the argument about it being a spoken promise but that it doesn't really count if it didn't end up in the final document. Sounded like BS the first time I heard it and still does.

I don't think Poland is relevant. Putin invaded Ukraine, not Poland.
I'm not excusing, justifying, or condoning it but it's pretty straightforward to see that Russia would see a coup that would cut off their seaport as a threat they couldn't back away from. While he may be a slippery character it seems like this is one of the things he pointed out in his justifications.

What seaport?

 

[RLD]

you posted this directly below the link to the declassified docs. More irony.

I've heard the argument about it being a spoken promise but that it doesn't really count if it didn't end up in the final document. Sounded like BS the first time I heard it and still does.

I don't think Poland is relevant. Putin invaded Ukraine, not Poland.
I'm not excusing, justifying, or condoning it but it's pretty straightforward to see that Russia would see a coup that would cut off their seaport as a threat they couldn't back away from. While he may be a slippery character it seems like this is one of the things he pointed out in his justifications.

OF course Poland is relevant. The expansion to Poland took place after the alleged "promise" and was explicitly approved of by the Russian head of State, Yeltsin. Meaning that the Russian head of state approved of a specific NATO expansion that occurred after the alleged agreement not to. In legal terms we would call that waiver.

I guess your theory is that international relations involving hundreds of thousands of lives and billions upon billions of dollars should be governed by unverified and never reduced to writing promises made by people who would never have authority to bind NATO or their own country anyways. That can't end badly.

Why you seem so invested in defending a clear bogus Putin pretext for war is beyond me.

 

[Datchew]

OF course Poland is relevant. The expansion to Poland took place after the alleged "promise" and was explicitly approved of by the Russian head of State, Yeltsin. Meaning that the Russian head of state approved of a specific NATO expansion that occurred after the alleged agreement not to. In legal terms we would call that waiver.

I guess your theory is that international relations involving hundreds of thousands of lives and billions upon billions of dollars should be governed by unverified and never reduced to writing promises made by people who would never have authority to bind NATO or their own country anyways. That can't end badly.

Why you seem so invested in defending a clear bogus Putin pretext for war is beyond me.

I'm not invested. You're either confused or just tossing around wild accusations.
Perhaps you just can't read well? You actually quoted me saying I'm not excusing justifying or condoning.

 

[Vashper]

... Tariffs will drive costs up across the board. This will pass along to the consumer who will be forced to reduce overall consumption to stay at the same expenditure level. This will reduce corporate profits and slow the economy. ....

Yes, it will reduce the profits of corporations - those corporations that trade in imports. But high import prices allow domestic manufacturing corporations to produce.

 

[Vashper]

...

Further Yeltsin explicitly approved of the expansion of NATO into Poland, long after any such verbal promise may have been made. That resulted in the now near dead NATO-Russia Founding Act which also does not prohibit NATO expansion.

The fact that Yeltsin "approved" the expansion of NATO is an exaggeration. There are also such points in the declassified in 2024 package of documents: "the Russian president openly told Clinton that he considers the conclusion of the Founding Act to be a forced step. "Our position has not changed. NATO's eastward advance is still a mistake. But I must take steps to mitigate the negative consequences for Russia. I am ready to conclude an agreement with NATO, not because I want to, but because it is a necessary step. There is no other solution for today," the Russian leader said. He also stated the inadmissibility of deploying nuclear and non-nuclear weapons on the territory of new NATO members and thereby creating a "cordon sanitaire" directed against Russia.

 

[Tanks]

Yes, it will reduce the profits of corporations - those corporations that trade in imports. But high import prices allow domestic manufacturing corporations to produce.

Retooling takes time. Some stuff even with high tariffs is still cheaper than could be produced locally. I gave an example of Target sweatpants made in China vs US made ones by American Giant a while ago. Pricing difference was 10X. So, with 200% tariffs the difference would be 5X. All it means is a consumption tax income for the Feds. Maybe, that is the intent.

Also, the next administration most likely would do away with most of the tariffs.

 

[CJW]

A WI judge tried to aid in the escape of an illegal who was in court on a domestic abuse case. For the life of me I can't imagine why you would want to do such a thing other than severe TDS. She belongs nowhere near the justice system.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested/index.html

“We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the subject — an illegal alien — to evade arrest,” FBI Director Kash Patel said on X in a post Friday morning. “Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on foot and he’s been in custody since, but the Judge’s obstruction created increased danger to the public.”

 

[steve white]

It is working. One of our projects is replacing the automation on a multitude of pump stations for a municipal district. They used.Bristol Babcock RTUs programmed in their Accol programming language back in 1991. No documentation or drawings, a reverse engineering project to start. Using AI we not only documented the programs, but converted them to Siemens SCL language with about 95% accuracy. Already saved us thousands of hours of engineering time (read profit).

I agree, and envision medical research to be multiplied by AI. It can search and correlate peer reviewed studies from all over the world.