PDA

View Full Version : Trump Allies Quietly Push Plan for Russia and Ukraine



hotair
02-21-2017, 01:21 PM
Trumps layer is engineering a plan that would allow the US to end the sanctions against Russia.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-russia.html?_r=0

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/2/19/1635623/-Trump-allies-deliver-plan-to-lift-Russian-sanctions-by-helping-to-topple-the-Ukrainian-government


All we would have to do is to sell out the Ukrainian people. Giving Putin everything that he wants, so that he can end his invasion of Ukraine. Then the US would be able to end the sanctions, thus allowing Trump to build one of his towers in Moscow.

pjohns
02-21-2017, 01:42 PM
Trumps layer is engineering a plan that would allow the US to end the sanctions against Russia.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-russia.html?_r=0

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/2/19/1635623/-Trump-allies-deliver-plan-to-lift-Russian-sanctions-by-helping-to-topple-the-Ukrainian-government

And your proof of this is (the leftist) New York Times and (the far leftist) Daily Kos.

As to the latter, I would place more faith--in fact, far more faith--in the National Enquirer (or any other tabloid)...

Green Arrow
02-21-2017, 02:02 PM
President Trump can (and probably will, I would expect) try to end sanctions on Russia, but it will fail. Enough members of Congress support the sanctions to give them a veto-proof majority.

rcfieldz
02-21-2017, 02:49 PM
We all know what Putin has in mind for the Ukraine. It's more than that.

valley ranch
02-21-2017, 03:49 PM
Greetings fellows and girls, Crimea has been Russian, Crimea what given to, placed in Ukraine as a protectorate some years ago.
Ukraine elected a president.
That president was driven from office by militants.
The people in Crimea objected to the treatment so strongly the elected to become separate from Ukraine.
Ukraine, those who had taken over the government went against Crimea by force of arms.

Putin does not want Ukraine or could take it in 2 days and 4 hours.

Russia favors Crimea, Russian army in not in Crimea but Russians are not forbidden to aid or fight for and with Crimea.

We have no good reason to sanction Russia, Russia has shown less aggression than we have.

*China on the other hand has taken a neighboring country killing their way in and annexed the country and is brutalizing people and they are now a most favored nation to the United States.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p50OhFGnOgE

There is no need, nothing in it for US, to keep up the Cold War. The Communist glob would like us to plague Russia but they are not in complete control of our government at the moment, their enemies are not ours~on the contrary!

They, the Communists, are doing well in Ukraine. And China as well!

(To tell a little from the other side~Some people were here, skiing up at the lake, Lake Tahoe, when asked why the Elected Government was under attack, the answer was: The president was stealing money.

The majority of Ukrainians voted the president in~a minority took over the government by force.

The Soviet ran Ukraine, when Russia threw off the Soviet they lost power in Ukraine~ free elections~government taken over by force.

Sanctions should maybe be placed on Ukraine!

what's your thought?

Green Arrow
02-21-2017, 04:28 PM
We all know what Putin has in mind for the Ukraine. It's more than that.

And just what does he have in mind?

Peter1469
02-21-2017, 05:44 PM
We all know what Putin has in mind for the Ukraine. It's more than that.

Russia cannot afford to absorb the Ukraine. Its economy is very weak as it is.

The Ukraine should end the conflict.

hotair
02-22-2017, 01:35 AM
And just what does he have in mind?
The top thing on Putin’s mind, is to be crowned an Emperor.
Re-establishing to former Soviet Empire would be a good start, in his mind.

Trump has advocated putting an end to the EU.
Trump has advocated ending NATO.

The world watching the US sell out Ukraine, and walking away; would pretty much hand Eastern Europe over to Putin.

hotair
02-22-2017, 01:39 AM
Russia cannot afford to absorb the Ukraine. Its economy is very weak as it is.

The Ukraine should end the conflict.


I am sure that the Ukranian people would agree with you whole heartedly . . . If some one would sell them the arms that they need to get the job done!

As things are the only way that Ukraine has to do what you suggest is to surrender.

Casper
02-22-2017, 01:43 AM
Trumps layer is engineering a plan that would allow the US to end the sanctions against Russia.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-russia.html?_r=0

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/2/19/1635623/-Trump-allies-deliver-plan-to-lift-Russian-sanctions-by-helping-to-topple-the-Ukrainian-government


All we would have to do is to sell out the Ukrainian people. Giving Putin everything that he wants, so that he can end his invasion of Ukraine. Then the US would be able to end the sanctions, thus allowing Trump to build one of his towers in Moscow.

He can try, me thinks the Republican controlled Congress might have something to say on the matter. One of these days the trump will finally go too far and that will be that for him.

Green Arrow
02-22-2017, 01:51 AM
The top thing on Putin’s mind, is to be crowned an Emperor.
Re-establishing to former Soviet Empire would be a good start, in his mind.

Trump has advocated putting an end to the EU.
Trump has advocated ending NATO.

The world watching the US sell out Ukraine, and walking away; would pretty much hand Eastern Europe over to Putin.

I suspected you had no idea what you were talking about. Looks like I was right.

hotair
02-22-2017, 01:57 AM
He can try, me thinks the Republican controlled Congress might have something to say on the matter. One of these days the trump will finally go too far and that will be that for him.

If we (that is to say Trump) gives Putin everything that we wants, I can not see where there would be any reason for the Congress to continue with any of the sanctions.

It is not as though the GOP is above hypocrisy. It is only that once Ukraine is returned to Putin, he would end his invasion withdrawing his military forces, and all of the reasons for the sanctions completely disappear.

hotair
02-22-2017, 02:06 AM
I suspected you had no idea what you were talking about. Looks like I was right.
Imagine how surprised you are going to be when you learn how wrong you are.

Peter1469
02-22-2017, 05:26 AM
The top thing on Putin’s mind, is to be crowned an Emperor.

No it is not.

Re-establishing to former Soviet Empire would be a good start, in his mind.
Not true. He understands that Russia cannot afford another Soviet Empire. But what Putin does want is the nations in his near abroad (next door neighbors) to be pro-Russian or neutral at the worse. Not pro-Western. And part of NATO is an existential threat to Russia.

Trump has advocated putting an end to the EU. No. He advocated to let it fail. Which it is doing on its own.

Trump has advocated ending NATO. He advocates for NATO members to pay their own share.


The world watching the US sell out Ukraine, and walking away; would pretty much hand Eastern Europe over to Putin.

Peter1469
02-22-2017, 05:29 AM
I am American not Ukrainian.

In US foreign policy the number one issue for me is American vital national security interests.

The Ukraine is a corrupt nation run by organized crime. Its military is made up of militias whose first loyalty is to a criminal boss. The only reason it ever had periods of being pro-west was from CIA support.

Regardless, the Ukraine is on Russia's doorstep. US interest in the Ukraine merits some attention, but not a war with Russia. Russia got heavily involved in Syria in part to obtain leverage in the Ukraine talks (and associated sanctions).

If Russia will help with the Islamic State in Syria in exchange for peace in the Ukraine and an end to the sanctions, that is what is called a good deal for the US. We have actual national security interests is weakening ISIL.

I am sure that the Ukranian people would agree with you whole heartedly . . . If some one would sell them the arms that they need to get the job done!

As things are the only way that Ukraine has to do what you suggest is to surrender.

pjohns
02-22-2017, 07:56 PM
Trump has advocated ending NATO.
This is true.

But more recently (in fact, very recently), Donald Trump--through his vice-president, Mike Pence--has indicated just the opposite.

He has demanded only that other NATO members pay their fair share (of two percent, at least).

True, Trump may be faulted for giving conflicting signals here.

But I would not take the earlier signal at face value--or totally overlook the latter one...

hotair
02-23-2017, 04:29 PM
No it is not.
Not true. He understands that Russia cannot afford another Soviet Empire. But what Putin does want is the nations in his near abroad (next door neighbors) to be pro-Russian or neutral at the worse. Not pro-Western. And part of NATO is an existential threat to Russia.
No. He advocated to let it fail. Which it is doing on its own.
He advocates for NATO members to pay their own share.

Even the most cursory inspection of Putin exposes his ambitions.
He wants Russia returned to its former glory. The Soviet Union collapsed because of the failure of Communism. Prior to the revolution, Imperial Russia under the Czars, did quite well for the imperial family.

As for NATO. NATO by design is purely a defensive organization, and it does not pose any threat to anyone, much less Russia. The only threat NATO posses to Putin is that it would defend the Eastern European countries from any (and all) future aggression's arising from Russian expansion ambitions. In other words NATO (by protecting eastern Europe) stands between Putin and his dreams of a new Russian Empire.

The EU may fail, and it may not. The rest of the world said the very same things about the US in its early days of Confederacy. The American colonists changed, and so can the EU.

hotair
02-23-2017, 04:31 PM
I am American not Ukrainian.

In US foreign policy the number one issue for me is American vital national security interests.

The Ukraine is a corrupt nation run by organized crime. Its military is made up of militias whose first loyalty is to a criminal boss. The only reason it ever had periods of being pro-west was from CIA support.

Regardless, the Ukraine is on Russia's doorstep. US interest in the Ukraine merits some attention, but not a war with Russia. Russia got heavily involved in Syria in part to obtain leverage in the Ukraine talks (and associated sanctions).

If Russia will help with the Islamic State in Syria in exchange for peace in the Ukraine and an end to the sanctions, that is what is called a good deal for the US. We have actual national security interests is weakening ISIL.
I guess then that it all depends on what you believe American National Interests should be.
History shows us the folly of isolationism! Just because we choose to ignore the rest of the world, does not mean that it does not exist.

Ukraine is a fledgling democracy going through the usual growing pains. Trying to morph from a strong arm authoritarian regime to a true democracy. The US went through the very same growing pains.


But Russia is not at all interested in helping anyone out with ISIL. Russia is only interested in keeping its naval base in Syria, by supporting the current regime. If ISIL did not threaten the current Syrian regime, and thus Russias naval base in Syria, Russia would not give a damn.

hotair
02-23-2017, 04:47 PM
This is true.

But more recently (in fact, very recently), Donald Trump--through his vice-president, Mike Pence--has indicated just the opposite.

He has demanded only that other NATO members pay their fair share (of two percent, at least).

True, Trump may be faulted for giving conflicting signals here.

But I would not take the earlier signal at face value--or totally overlook the latter one...

Trump has not given ‘conflicting signals.’

Pence’s mission was to try and convince the European NATO nations that Trump does not mean what he says.

As for everyone else paying ‘their fair share of the dues’ is the exact same excuse the Republicans hand out when ever they move to implode the UN! It is after all a well proven "good" sound-bite!!!

Whether or not Trumps position should be taken at face value, all depends on how deep Putin has his hooks into Trump.

Has America been saddled with a Trump White House, or a Putin White House?!?
If Putin really did engineer Trumps campaign, then what we have is a Putin White House.

The Xl
02-23-2017, 04:49 PM
Democrats, the new Neocons

Peter1469
02-23-2017, 06:08 PM
Even the most cursory inspection of Putin exposes his ambitions.
He wants Russia returned to its former glory. The Soviet Union collapsed because of the failure of Communism. Prior to the revolution, Imperial Russia under the Czars, did quite well for the imperial family.

As for NATO. NATO by design is purely a defensive organization, and it does not pose any threat to anyone, much less Russia. The only threat NATO posses to Putin is that it would defend the Eastern European countries from any (and all) future aggression's arising from Russian expansion ambitions. In other words NATO (by protecting eastern Europe) stands between Putin and his dreams of a new Russian Empire.

The EU may fail, and it may not. The rest of the world said the very same things about the US in its early days of Confederacy. The American colonists changed, and so can the EU.

Putin expressly has no intention of recreating the Soviet Union. He does want to manipulate Russia's nearabroad into being pro-Russia. He understands the economics of the issue.

The EU will not survive in its current form. You may see some of the deadbeat countries get kicked out. You may see more autonomous member states. You may see just the core nations remain part of the EU.

Elites want the EU to unit politically as they have economically. The people do not want that.

Peter1469
02-23-2017, 06:09 PM
Isolationism is not a topic in this thread. I am not advocating for it. I am a realist. The US has little vital national security interests in the Ukraine, while the Russians have a lot of vital interests at stake.



I guess then that it all depends on what you believe American National Interests should be.
History shows us the folly of isolationism! Just because we choose to ignore the rest of the world, does not mean that it does not exist.

Ukraine is a fledgling democracy going through the usual growing pains. Trying to morph from a strong arm authoritarian regime to a true democracy. The US went through the very same growing pains.


But Russia is not at all interested in helping anyone out with ISIL. Russia is only interested in keeping its naval base in Syria, by supporting the current regime. If ISIL did not threaten the current Syrian regime, and thus Russias naval base in Syria, Russia would not give a damn.

Newpublius
02-23-2017, 06:16 PM
I guess then that it all depends on what you believe American National Interests should be.
History shows us the folly of isolationism! Just because we choose to ignore the rest of the world, does not mean that it does not exist.

Ukraine is a fledgling democracy going through the usual growing pains. Trying to morph from a strong arm authoritarian regime to a true democracy. The US went through the very same growing pains.


But Russia is not at all interested in helping anyone out with ISIL. Russia is only interested in keeping its naval base in Syria, by supporting the current regime. If ISIL did not threaten the current Syrian regime, and thus Russias naval base in Syria, Russia would not give a damn.

History shows us the folly of isolationism? How exactly?

pjohns
02-23-2017, 07:44 PM
Trump has not given ‘conflicting signals.’

Pence’s mission was to try and convince the European NATO nations that Trump does not mean what he says.

As for everyone else paying ‘their fair share of the dues’ is the exact same excuse the Republicans hand out when ever they move to implode the UN! It is after all a well proven "good" sound-bite!!!

Whether or not Trumps position should be taken at face value, all depends on how deep Putin has his hooks into Trump.

Has America been saddled with a Trump White House, or a Putin White House?!?
If Putin really did engineer Trumps campaign, then what we have is a Putin White House.
Much of what you have said in prior posts is really quite good, I believe.

But this sounds like just more far-left talking points, deriving from an unassuaged bitterness, and a resultant desire to delegitimize Donald Trump...

Ethereal
02-23-2017, 07:50 PM
All we would have to do is to sell out the Ukrainian people.

Just curious. Who appointed you the spokesperson for the Ukrainian people?


Giving Putin everything that he wants, so that he can end his invasion of Ukraine.

He can't end something that never began in the first place. There has been no Russian invasion of Ukraine.


Then the US would be able to end the sanctions, thus allowing Trump to build one of his towers in Moscow.

So you think Trump wants to normalize relations with Russia so he can build a tower in Moscow... that doesn't sound far-fetched at all.

Ethereal
02-23-2017, 07:51 PM
The top thing on Putin’s mind, is to be crowned an Emperor.
Re-establishing to former Soviet Empire would be a good start, in his mind.

Trump has advocated putting an end to the EU.
Trump has advocated ending NATO.

The world watching the US sell out Ukraine, and walking away; would pretty much hand Eastern Europe over to Putin.
And your evidence that Putin wants to reestablish the Soviet Empire is... ?

Ethereal
02-23-2017, 07:53 PM
I am sure that the Ukranian people would agree with you whole heartedly . . .

I'm sure you don't have the first clue what "the Ukrainian people" would agree with.

Ethereal
02-23-2017, 07:57 PM
Even the most cursory inspection of Putin exposes his ambitions.
He wants Russia returned to its former glory. The Soviet Union collapsed because of the failure of Communism. Prior to the revolution, Imperial Russia under the Czars, did quite well for the imperial family.

As for NATO. NATO by design is purely a defensive organization, and it does not pose any threat to anyone, much less Russia. The only threat NATO posses to Putin is that it would defend the Eastern European countries from any (and all) future aggression's arising from Russian expansion ambitions. In other words NATO (by protecting eastern Europe) stands between Putin and his dreams of a new Russian Empire.

The EU may fail, and it may not. The rest of the world said the very same things about the US in its early days of Confederacy. The American colonists changed, and so can the EU.

So give us your compelling evidence that proves Putin has ambitions to reconstitute the Soviet Empire.

As for NATO being a purely defensive organization, that is just propaganda. In reality, it's been steadily expanding towards Russia's borders in violation of the agreement that ended the cold war. That is an aggressive act, not a defensive one.

Ethereal
02-23-2017, 08:02 PM
I guess then that it all depends on what you believe American National Interests should be.
History shows us the folly of isolationism! Just because we choose to ignore the rest of the world, does not mean that it does not exist.

Ukraine is a fledgling democracy going through the usual growing pains. Trying to morph from a strong arm authoritarian regime to a true democracy. The US went through the very same growing pains.


But Russia is not at all interested in helping anyone out with ISIL. Russia is only interested in keeping its naval base in Syria, by supporting the current regime. If ISIL did not threaten the current Syrian regime, and thus Russias naval base in Syria, Russia would not give a damn.

Ukraine's "fledgling democracy" elected Viktor Yanukovych president in 2010. The western Ukrainian faction, in cooperation with the CIA, overthrew him in a coup. So you're actually on the opposite side of democracy in Ukraine. Your side is the side of neo-Nazi paramilitaries and corrupt fascists.

ripmeister
02-23-2017, 09:29 PM
History shows us the folly of isolationism? How exactly?

Not isolationism per se rather nationalism throughout Europe in the early part of the twentieth century led to two world wars. I'd say that is significant.

ripmeister
02-23-2017, 09:37 PM
I'm not sure about Putin wanting to get back to the Soviet empire days but this just being about defense of Russia as his rationale is a stretch too. From what I've read in serious analyses of Putin and his psychology class s that he has felt dissed by the international community, that Russia gets no respect any longer as a prime player on the international scene. This would seem to fit with his authoritarian, arrogant persona.

pjohns
02-24-2017, 03:13 PM
Not isolationism per se rather nationalism throughout Europe in the early part of the twentieth century led to two world wars.
I cannot argue with this analysis.

Nonetheless, I remain a staunch nationalist; I have the lowest possible regard for globalism.

Peter1469
02-24-2017, 03:26 PM
That and the nations of Europe today do not have large standing armies and the other political issues that lead to WWI and WWII.


I cannot argue with this analysis.

Nonetheless, I remain a staunch nationalist; I have the lowest possible regard for globalism.

hotair
03-03-2017, 06:46 AM
I'm not sure about Putin wanting to get back to the Soviet empire days but this just being about defense of Russia as his rationale is a stretch too. From what I've read in serious analyses of Putin and his psychology class s that he has felt dissed by the international community, that Russia gets no respect any longer as a prime player on the international scene. This would seem to fit with his authoritarian, arrogant persona.
I get the distinct impression that you might not have a proper appreciation of the poetic sound of
. . . Czar Vlad the First.
Founder of the House of Putin.


Putin may not be of the house of Romanov . . . But then the House of Romanov no longer exists. So the Imperial crown can go to whoever has the will to claim it!

Putin’s biggest issue right now, is that the title “Czar of all of the Ruusias” has a pretty empty sound to it when all of the “Russias” consists of only Russia.
On another note: When Putin reunifies the former Empire the church would not be able to resist his command to place the Imperial Crown on his head.

On the other hand . . .

The collapse of the former Soviet Union left Russia as a third world developing nation. Pure and simple.

The fall from grace has left a rather bad taste in the mouths of the Russian people. Putin in particular. This is how he gets away with the things that he has done.

If the return to former glory means giving Putin an Imperial crown, then the majority of Russians are good with that.

hotair
03-03-2017, 06:47 AM
Democrats, the new Neocons
Do you have any clue of what the word "neocon" means?

hotair
03-03-2017, 06:58 AM
History shows us the folly of isolationism? How exactly?

Gee . . . That is a tough one!
I am not sure . . . two world wars???
Sucked into both, totally unprepared!

The rest of the world does exist. We live in this world. We are a part of it regardless if we like it or not. The global community is a reality. It is the way things are.

The problem of redefining words.
Depending on how the term "Nationalism" is used today, it can have two legitimate meanings. Fascism or isolationism!

Green Arrow
03-03-2017, 07:06 AM
I get the distinct impression that you might not have a proper appreciation of the poetic sound of
. . . Czar Vlad the First.
Founder of the House of Putin.


Putin may not be of the house of Romanov . . . But then the House of Romanov no longer exists. So the Imperial crown can go to whoever has the will to claim it!

Putin’s biggest issue right now, is that the title “Czar of all of the Ruusias” has a pretty empty sound to it when all of the “Russias” consists of only Russia.
On another note: When Putin reunifies the former Empire the church would not be able to resist his command to place the Imperial Crown on his head.

On the other hand . . .

The collapse of the former Soviet Union left Russia as a third world developing nation. Pure and simple.

The fall from grace has left a rather bad taste in the mouths of the Russian people. Putin in particular. This is how he gets away with the things that he has done.

If the return to former glory means giving Putin an Imperial crown, then the majority of Russians are good with that.

House Romanov does still exist, just not in power.

hotair
03-03-2017, 07:26 AM
Much of what you have said in prior posts is really quite good, I believe.

But this sounds like just more far-left talking points, deriving from an unassuaged bitterness, and a resultant desire to delegitimize Donald Trump...

With the call logs, and the phone records, and even recordings, along with other things . . .
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-trump-campaign-manager-faced-blackmail-attempt-report/ar-AAnfRBZ?ocid=spartandhp
. . . . .

There is no question about Putins influence in the White House. The only question (right now) is what is the nature of Putins influence. Does Putin have direct control through Trump, or is it more indirect through Trumps advisers? It does make a real big difference.

The FBI has/is investigating. Thus all of the news stories going as far back as last June. As well as other matters . . .
The FBI has been reporting their findings to the proper authorities. However with results such as . . . .http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-adviser-asked-fbi-to-dispute-russia-reports/ar-AAnhwQI?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
. . . . .
We end up with these ‘so called’ leaks! People trying to cover their asses from any possible future ‘conspiracy to obstruct’ charges!

Bottom line: The FBI is not a prosecutorial agency; the FBI is a investigative agency.
The FBI is a sub-agency of the DOJ.
Which means that the FBI works for the AG . . .
Which means that the FBI works for Trump . . .
Which means that the FBI works for Putin . . . now!
In any event the FBI has no legal authority to press charges. Much less prosecute. Additionally ever since the Republicans abolished the “Office of Special Prosecutor” the only authority that can act is the AG.

. . . Or . . . The Congress!


On the other hand . . .
Trump is a reality. (The people of this country are going to get exactly what they deserve. And I do not have a problem with that!) This is not a question of legitimacy. It is the question of legality, and precedent!

Republican political operatives have sold the election to the highest bidder, and Putin won . . . This time.

I do not have a problem with a Putin White House. We are stuck with it for the next four years. There is not a damned thing that can be done to change it!

The problem is:
The future. Just because Putin won this time, does mean that he is going to win again in the next election. Nor does it mean that he will be the only player next time either.



As to the precedent I mentioned earlier. The GOP has gotten away with a number actions, each worse then the previous.

Reagan got away with out right defying congress. (Iran - Contra)

W’s CoS got away with outing an active CIA recruiter/operative, costing the lives of more then a dozen people. Regardless if they had been successfully recruited or not! (Valerie Plame)

Now . . . What is tantamount to out right treason.

This gets swept under the carpet again . . . I am not too sure that the country can survive what comes next. Then again, the country may not survive this.

hotair
03-03-2017, 07:31 AM
House Romanov does still exist, just not in power.

There is a rather sizable “reward” for anyone able to prove what you suggest.
Since no one has bothered to try and claim it, it is reasonable to assume that there are no takers.

hotair
03-03-2017, 08:37 AM
As I have said earlier. I do not have a problem with the current Putin White House.
(Selling out Eastern Europe will have very series consequences. However that would not be our problem! Europeans made the mistake of trusting Americans - they get to live with that!)

I would prefer for Americans to govern themselves, but I can live with the current arrangement. It is just that now that Russia has shown the rest of the world how to do it . . . . .


I personally do not believe that a Kim Jong Un White House is in the near future. I just do not see China protecting North Korea from Russia. Not when they (China) can have it for themselves.

Unfortunately Putin is not the only player. China - India - any of the Arab oil countries - Turkey - maybe even Egypt, are all possible future players.

I am a bit concerned that a future bidding war, could break out into a nuclear war. Given the current dispersion of nuclear weapons, it is a real possibility.

I do believe that the worse case scenario for the American people would be a sort of international committee (rather then a bidding war) running our country. Too many chefs will (as it were) ruin the soup.



Of course, I am not the only American citizen in our fair country. A good number of my fellow citizens are not at all as accommodating about our current condition as I am! As they see it . . . Putin is not THEIR President!


But then neither is Trump.
The only way that Trump could become everyones President, would be if he became EVERYONES President.
Not just the Wall Street Bankers.
Not just the extreme radical religious right (tea baggers).
Not just the KKK!
And definitely not Putins puppet.

Trump has to want to become the President of everybody! While “do what I order” works in the business world, it does not cut it in the world of governing, he must come to grips with the fact that he is no longer a corporate CEO any longer. Simply saying “I won . . . Now everybody has to do whatever I say” has not worked, and will not work.
Trump really has to stop worrying about the fact that he is not popular, never will be popular, and start learning how to do the job that he has. Even though it will mean double crossing Putin. He really does have to accept that he won the election with a whole lot of help from Putin, cut his loses, and move on! I understand that he wishes to be loyal to the people who got him elected, but when the person at the top of the list is the leader of another country (especially a country that is not exactly friendly with us right now) his idea of loyalty is going to be the end of him.

del
03-03-2017, 09:58 AM
There is a rather sizable “reward” for anyone able to prove what you suggest.
Since no one has bothered to try and claim it, it is reasonable to assume that there are no takers.


In early 1917 the Romanov dynasty had 65 members, 18 of whom were killed by the Bolsheviks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolshevik). The remaining 47 members went into exile (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exile) abroad.[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Romanov#cite_note-3) In 1924, Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Vladimirovich,_Grand_Duke_of_Russia), the senior, surviving male-line (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrilineality) descendant of Alexander II of Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_II_of_Russia) by primogeniture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture), claimed the headship of the defunct Imperial House of Russia. Since 1991, the succession to the former Russian throne (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_of_succession_to_the_former_Russian_throne) has been in dispute, largely due to disagreements over the validity of dynasts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasty#Dynasts)' marriages.
Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duchess_Maria_Vladimirovna_of_Russia) claims to hold the title of empress in pretense (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretender) with her only child, George Mikhailovich (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duke_George_Mikhailovich_of_Russia), as heir apparent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heir_apparent). Others have argued in support of the rights of the late Prince Nicholas Romanovich Romanov (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Romanovich,_Prince_of_Russia), whose brother Prince Dimitri Romanov (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Dimitri_Romanov) was the next heir male of his branch after whom it is now passed to Prince Andrew Romanov (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Andrew_Romanov).

MisterVeritis
03-03-2017, 11:57 AM
He can try, me thinks the Republican controlled Congress might have something to say on the matter. One of these days the trump will finally go too far and that will be that for him.
You should plan for eight wonderful Trump years.

Don
03-03-2017, 12:19 PM
Reforming the USSR wouldn't be nearly as easy as it was when at the end of WWII the countries were in a weakened state and virtually sold out to Russia by Britain and the U.S. Now that those countries from the eastern bloc have tasted freedom again they won't so easily fall again. Especially Poland. I would like to see those countries form their own pacts for common defense with their neighbors but not extend NATO to them.

Green Arrow
03-03-2017, 12:26 PM
There is a rather sizable “reward” for anyone able to prove what you suggest.
Since no one has bothered to try and claim it, it is reasonable to assume that there are no takers.

Spend less time typing and more time researching. You get a great many things wrong.

Peter1469
03-03-2017, 03:52 PM
The underlined is insanity.

As I have said earlier. I do not have a problem with the current Putin White House.
(Selling out Eastern Europe will have very series consequences. However that would not be our problem! Europeans made the mistake of trusting Americans - they get to live with that!)

I would prefer for Americans to govern themselves, but I can live with the current arrangement. It is just that now that Russia has shown the rest of the world how to do it . . . . .


I personally do not believe that a Kim Jong Un White House is in the near future. I just do not see China protecting North Korea from Russia. Not when they (China) can have it for themselves.

Unfortunately Putin is not the only player. China - India - any of the Arab oil countries - Turkey - maybe even Egypt, are all possible future players.

I am a bit concerned that a future bidding war, could break out into a nuclear war. Given the current dispersion of nuclear weapons, it is a real possibility.

I do believe that the worse case scenario for the American people would be a sort of international committee (rather then a bidding war) running our country. Too many chefs will (as it were) ruin the soup.



Of course, I am not the only American citizen in our fair country. A good number of my fellow citizens are not at all as accommodating about our current condition as I am! As they see it . . . Putin is not THEIR President!


But then neither is Trump.
The only way that Trump could become everyones President, would be if he became EVERYONES President.
Not just the Wall Street Bankers.
Not just the extreme radical religious right (tea baggers).
Not just the KKK!
And definitely not Putins puppet.

Trump has to want to become the President of everybody! While “do what I order” works in the business world, it does not cut it in the world of governing, he must come to grips with the fact that he is no longer a corporate CEO any longer. Simply saying “I won . . . Now everybody has to do whatever I say” has not worked, and will not work.
Trump really has to stop worrying about the fact that he is not popular, never will be popular, and start learning how to do the job that he has. Even though it will mean double crossing Putin. He really does have to accept that he won the election with a whole lot of help from Putin, cut his loses, and move on! I understand that he wishes to be loyal to the people who got him elected, but when the person at the top of the list is the leader of another country (especially a country that is not exactly friendly with us right now) his idea of loyalty is going to be the end of him.