Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Because they appear to be more keen to do business with him in the first place. The ethnostate part is mostly incidental from his POV - I don't really think the ideology matters to him much - but it is patently obvious that is the horse he is backing from a profit perspective and is highly likely to be the consequence for everyone if his influence is successful. 

 

Whether or not that's a good decision from him in terms of personal gain is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Edit: and history shows that the creation of ethnostates through oppression and death is entirely possible, and the attempt has been responsible for some rather large historical atrocities.

Profit from what business though?

Posted
23 minutes ago, Lionator said:

If trump wanted to invade Britain, occupy it and install a MAGA type government, could we defend it and would we even defend it? 

I would hope Trump would be overturned in a coup before his military would invade the UK.  If not then send in the SAS.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Profit from what business though?

The primary ones that he currently owns or others that he might seek to acquire - Twitter and Tesla, to name two.

 

As per above, I don't see the logic either and whether it's a good business move is entirely subjective, but the fact is that a corollary of his meddling is highly likely to be highly nationalist governments that will attempt to enact ethnostates.

Posted
36 minutes ago, Lionator said:

If trump wanted to invade Britain, occupy it and install a MAGA type government, could we defend it and would we even defend it? 

 Like with Greenland, Canada, the Panama Canal and whatever else he's been banging on about in the past few days - Congress would never approve military action.

 

So I just don't know what his angle is. Is it attention? Deadcatting to detract from election promises that won't be fulfilled? 

 

Trey Parker and Matt Stone would struggle to come up with this stuff. 

  • Like 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

 Like with Greenland, Canada, the Panama Canal and whatever else he's been banging on about in the past few days - Congress would never approve military action.

 

So I just don't know what his angle is. Is it attention? Deadcatting to detract from election promises that won't be fulfilled? 

 

Trey Parker and Matt Stone would struggle to come up with this stuff. 

His angle is to pressure Denmark and Panama into selling. I doubt it crossed his mind regarding congress approval in the process.

 

I find the best way to think of Trump is that he’s simultaneously not as stupid as you think and also stupider than you think.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Lionator said:

If trump wanted to invade Britain, occupy it and install a MAGA type government, could we defend it and would we even defend it? 

Remember he owns world class golf resorts at Doonbeg in Ireland and Aberdeen and Turnberry in Scotland, so he won't be invading them.

 

England and Wales might be up for grabs though...

Posted
2 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Remember he owns world class golf resorts at Doonbeg in Ireland and Aberdeen and Turnberry in Scotland, so he won't be invading them.

 

England and Wales might be up for grabs though...

From what I can tell, both the Scots and Irish locals have some rather choice things to say about the fact that he owns those two courses.

Posted

The depressing thing is, that one of Trump’s selling points in the election was that he was “the anti-war” candidate, even several on here argued it. Even though it was clear reading between the lines that meant America standing anside and letting Russia and China do what they want. It seems we were all wrong and Trump actually doesn’t even want to rule out wars if aggression against other Western democracies.

  • Like 2
Posted
4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Ah yes, the classic.

 

Though I must point out that the sign is wrong - Trump lacks both depth and warmth.

On the other hand,  full of promise with the likelyhood of serious and/or dire consequences.

Posted
4 hours ago, Sampson said:

The depressing thing is, that one of Trump’s selling points in the election was that he was “the anti-war” candidate, even several on here argued it. Even though it was clear reading between the lines that meant America standing anside and letting Russia and China do what they want. It seems we were all wrong and Trump actually doesn’t even want to rule out wars if aggression against other Western democracies.

He basically wants the same as Putin, he wants USA, Russia and China to have spheres of interest. Which is proper 19th century imperialist stuff. The problem is that while Putin is up for that and you could end up in an iron curtain situation with Russia, China absolutely doesn’t want that and it’s going to cause a lot of issues. 

Posted

Labour have disappointed me , particularly with their  cowardice over Brexit . Everyone with a still functioning brain and the rudiments of nouse knows the country’s economy  can never flourish when we can’t trade  freely with the biggest  bloc in the world on our own doorstep . Time to be honest . Stuff the billionaires who own the press and remove the sanctions we imposed on ourselves . 
Other than that I think they’ve made a decent start .
Whatever they do the right wing press will find a way to criticise . 
 

  • Like 3
Posted

Trumps postering towards taking over Canada, greenland and the panama canal is some seriously scary stuff. He's being serious and im not sure people are taking it as seriously as they should be. 

 

When asked about Greenland, he said that Denmark should give it to them, because they want it.  :yawn:

Posted

She really is crap, isn't she? 

 

Worse than crap, she's proving that she didn't give a damn about this tragic issue until it was in the news and she thought she could use it to jump start her flatlining leadership. Nasty, exploitative and inept. 

 

Gone after the locals.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Keep getting Katie Hopkins recommendations by YouTube.

No thanks..vile individual.

Edited by Wymsey
Posted
7 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Keep getting Katie Hopkins recommendations by YouTube.

No thanks..vile individual.

I honestly have no idea how she's still getting attention.

 

She looks like a boiled horse, she has no talent, she's profoundly unlikeable and has all the charisma of an anal polyp. 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Sly said:

 

Trump / Musk being tools.

 

A very good response. 

Don't have freedom though. 

  • Haha 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Don't have freedom though. 

They don't have Chinese soldiers either.

Posted
35 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Keep getting Katie Hopkins recommendations by YouTube.

No thanks..vile individual.

Is it linked to your most common internet searches ? Do you often use a word beginning with C ? 

  • Haha 4
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...