General News Thread

[Sly]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Additionally, now this has been done, I fear that this won't be the last such intervention in the near future. 

 

Trump may try for Greenland or similar, Putin will be emboldened even more in Ukraine and possibly elsewhere, Xi may figure the US won't bother to hassle him on Taiwan. 

 

Sometimes, our species really is disappointing. 

Whilst I don’t condone this at all, as he’s a dictator in reality, Greenland is very different.

 

If the United States tried anything like this in Greenland, Canada, Mexico, Cuba etc they’d face massive backlash as it would be an invasion in reality, not dissimilar to what Putin has done in Ukraine. 
 

 

 

[Sly]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Yeah, only sometimes. There's still decency, and still folks there who act to value something beyond their own line of sight both in space and time. 

 

It's just that the voice of the short term self interested destructive is very loud right now.

Those that shout loudest and project self interest tend to get media attention and get heard. So people like Trump get headlines as people want to know what “he’s done now”.

 

We still have lots of good people, it’s just over inflated with this vision that the world is full of self indulgent pricks, as that’s what we see in

social media or daily news on a daily basis. 

 

Those humble people in society don’t get airtime, as it isn’t done for a social media world.

[Tommy G]

10 hours ago, Super_horns said:

TBF Kier Starmer doesn’t seem to be a big fan of Maduro either .

 

The trouble is there won’t be a “peaceful and stable process” with Trump around .
 

It will be like a bull in a China shop .

He’s come out with his usual wishy washy message, which sounds like he supports what trump has done but also doesn’t nail his colours to the mast, standard really - lots of words and all salad. 

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, Sly said:

Whilst I don’t condone this at all, as he’s a dictator in reality, Greenland is very different.

 

If the United States tried anything like this in Greenland, Canada, Mexico, Cuba etc they’d face massive backlash as it would be an invasion in reality, not dissimilar to what Putin has done in Ukraine. 
 

 

I wish I was as sure about that as you are. Does anyone really think that the current US administration really cares about any kind of opinion or backlash outside of their own self interest right now? What, exactly, do they have to fear?

 

This is what happens when sociopaths have more power than anyone else. 

 

7 hours ago, Sly said:

Those that shout loudest and project self interest tend to get media attention and get heard. So people like Trump get headlines as people want to know what “he’s done now”.

 

We still have lots of good people, it’s just over inflated with this vision that the world is full of self indulgent pricks, as that’s what we see in

social media or daily news on a daily basis. 

 

Those humble people in society don’t get airtime, as it isn’t done for a social media world.

Very true. 

 

The rather dark comfort though is that those self interested pricks cannot conquer forever, because their way if thinking is incompatible with the survival of human civilisation and our species itself. The problem the rest of us face is neutralising them before they take everyone else with them, in a world that seems very beholden to the loudmouths and the self interested, as you say. 

 

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

He’s come out with his usual wishy washy message, which sounds like he supports what trump has done but also doesn’t nail his colours to the mast, standard really - lots of words and all salad. 

Can't disagree here, he's taken the wrong line on Trump from the start. 

 

That being said, I don't see either Badenoch or Farage taking anything near a better line on him either, given they both actually seem to want closer ties with that repugnant administration. 

[leicsmac]

And now he's intimating that he wants to do it again because "no one can stop us'. Presume Cuba is what he's thinking of first up?

Edited 4 January by leicsmac

[nnfox]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

He’s come out with his usual wishy washy message, which sounds like he supports what trump has done but also doesn’t nail his colours to the mast, standard really - lots of words and all salad. 

To be fair (I'm no Starmer fan), there's not much else he can do.  I dare say there's an awful lot of evidence and intelligence that the US were in possession of that they feel justified to do what they did.  Starmer almost certainly won't know the full picture so he, like the rest of the world, need to exercise some patience for the full facts to come out... Which might be a long time in a world where Joe Public believes they should receive full facts in a real time commentary.

 

Starmer is a lawyer, he's adopting a stance of allowing the relevant justice process to play out by sitting on the fence.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, nnfox said:

To be fair (I'm no Starmer fan), there's not much else he can do.  I dare say there's an awful lot of evidence and intelligence that the US were in possession of that they feel justified to do what they did.  Starmer almost certainly won't know the full picture so he, like the rest of the world, need to exercise some patience for the full facts to come out... Which might be a long time in a world where Joe Public believes they should receive full facts in a real time commentary.

 

Starmer is a lawyer, he's adopting a stance of allowing the relevant justice process to play out by sitting on the fence.

Would it really matter if there was or wasn't? Or that the current administration would bother with such justifications instead of simply doing what they want in the name of their own self interest again and again?

 

I'm not sure where the idea that they are interested in any kind of facts and evidence when they can and do make up both on the regular to suit themselves comes from here. 

[Dahnsouff]

Greenland is off the table imo, just because US self interest would prevent from risking damaging access to such a lucrative market.

Unless the US now feels so deeply embedded in European systems that any pushback would be transient, in that case all bets are off.

[nnfox]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Would it really matter if there was or wasn't? Or that the current administration would bother with such justifications instead of simply doing what they want in the name of their own self interest again and again?

 

I'm not sure where the idea that they are interested in any kind of facts and evidence when they can and do make up both on the regular to suit themselves comes from here. 

It's a valid question for sure.  There are many missing pieces to this particular puzzle which makes it a great environment for breeding of conspiracy theories.

 

Entering another state and arresting their leader is a ballsy move.  I'm sure it wouldn't have been done on a whim, but do the US have a lower threshold to justify the action than other countries? Maybe.  It's entirely possible that any "investigation" might have been driven by ulterior motives.  We don't know right now and we may never know!

 

 

[Fox in the North]

We are an insignificant little island with waning soft power and even smaller hard power clout in a world where the 3 biggest powers are practically authoritarian dictatorships.
 

I don’t think there would much our politicians would or could do irrelevant of their political persuasions except try to hold on.

Edited 4 January by Fox in the North

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, nnfox said:

It's a valid question for sure.  There are many missing pieces to this particular puzzle which makes it a great environment for breeding of conspiracy theories.

 

Entering another state and arresting their leader is a ballsy move.  I'm sure it wouldn't have been done on a whim, but do the US have a lower threshold to justify the action than other countries? Maybe.  It's entirely possible that any "investigation" might have been driven by ulterior motives.  We don't know right now and we may never know!

 

 

Yes, and yes is the answer to those two statements and IMO it's as obvious as the force of gravity. 

 

Their aims, both conceived and blatantly stated, are pretty clear so there's not really much need for nuance here. 

[Brizzle Fox]

54 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Greenland is off the table imo, just because US self interest would prevent from risking damaging access to such a lucrative market.

Unless the US now feels so deeply embedded in European systems that any pushback would be transient, in that case all bets are off.

I'd agree. Cuba next.

 

Although....

 

 

 

[Dahnsouff]

2 minutes ago, Brizzle Fox said:

I'd agree. Cuba next.

 

Although....

 

 

 

Nah, that's just because she thinks Venezuela is in Europe...

[westernpark]

Starmer being weak not condemning the events of yesterday and this is coming from someone who is a big fan of the prime minister. 
It will be Greenland next. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, westernpark said:

Starmer being weak not condemning the events of yesterday and this is coming from someone who is a big fan of the prime minister. 
It will be Greenland next. 

Maybe Greenland, probably Cuba. 

 

Will be somewhere. 

 

What was it I said about our species being a disappointment again?

[Trav Le Bleu]

Liberate Greenland from Danish despotism now! 

[westernpark]

45 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Maybe Greenland, probably Cuba. 

 

Will be somewhere. 

 

What was it I said about our species being a disappointment again?

Why not both?

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, westernpark said:

Why not both?

I'd laugh if the situation wasn't so absurdly consequential for all of us.

[Trav Le Bleu]

 

Right...

 

When I were young, used to go work fer t' drug cartel, 25 hours a day, filling condoms wit' crack for 5 pesos a day and at end o day Uncle Donald would come round and bomb the hell out of us, singing, "hallelujah!"

 

And that's if we were lucky!

[StanSP]

4 hours ago, Tommy G said:

He’s come out with his usual wishy washy message, which sounds like he supports what trump has done but also doesn’t nail his colours to the mast, standard really - lots of words and all salad. 

It's really disappointing when it can be so easy to say he doesn't agree with US actions but respects the right to have leaders like Maduro investigated using proper channels etc. It doesn't take a breath to condemn the actions. 

[BKLFox]

2 hours ago, Fox in the North said:

We are an insignificant little island with waning soft power and even smaller hard power clout in a world where the 3 biggest powers are practically authoritarian dictatorships.
 

I don’t think there would much our politicians would or could do irrelevant of their political persuasions except try to hold on.

So insignificant yet would be 1 of, if not the 1st country Putin would hit in a major war..we are still well respected throughout the world especially military wise.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

So insignificant yet would be 1 of, if not the 1st country Putin would hit in a major war..we are still well respected throughout the world especially military wise.

All the more reason for Starmer to do what @StanSP suggested above. It's deeply frustrating that, if the UK really is that well respected, that they're not using some of that diplomatic capital to tell the US that, quite frankly, that they're a bunch of fvcknuts right now. 

[Sly]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

And now he's intimating that he wants to do it again because "no one can stop us'. Presume Cuba is what he's thinking of first up?

I could see them taking Cuba by force if they had to. 

[danny.]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

All the more reason for Starmer to do what @StanSP suggested above. It's deeply frustrating that, if the UK really is that well respected, that they're not using some of that diplomatic capital to tell the US that, quite frankly, that they're a bunch of fvcknuts right now. 

We’re really not 

[WigstonWanderer]

6 hours ago, Fox in the North said:

We are an insignificant little island with waning soft power and even smaller hard power clout in a world where the 3 biggest powers are practically authoritarian dictatorships.
 

I don’t think there would much our politicians would or could do irrelevant of their political persuasions except try to hold on.

Get ready to become Airstrip One