quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
I want to be REALLY honest with you --
the loses from tourism, outside a very FEW "destination" cities, is meaningless -- less than the burden for supporting say, 130k illegals (NYC has the data) and the self-deportation already done (generally headed south) will save the US more than the tourist loss.

I think the trade war with canada is madness, but the BEST outcome of a protected trade war between us is that canada gets in a few good shots, and destroys their economy -- meanwhile, a couple extra ULCC pull up in the gulf, and there's next to zero impacts to the gas prices .. and if we wanna fight about cars, the us has more than a few mothballed plants that would take the jobs --

Sorry, canada can't win this, but they can contain it

"we'll sell to china" -- yep, for exactly the same price, THEN eat the shipping - accomplishing two things -1 willing to deal with china, 2 the EPA would then free up a couple permits, and we go to burn WTI --

quote:

Originally posted by MLindsay:
Please tell me about the outdated weapons we have given. Again what is the limit of what we should give them. Still no answers

quote:

Originally posted by medved:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
I want to be REALLY honest with you --
the loses from tourism, outside a very FEW "destination" cities, is meaningless -- less than the burden for supporting say, 130k illegals (NYC has the data) and the self-deportation already done (generally headed south) will save the US more than the tourist loss.

I think the trade war with canada is madness, but the BEST outcome of a protected trade war between us is that canada gets in a few good shots, and destroys their economy -- meanwhile, a couple extra ULCC pull up in the gulf, and there's next to zero impacts to the gas prices .. and if we wanna fight about cars, the us has more than a few mothballed plants that would take the jobs --

Sorry, canada can't win this, but they can contain it

"we'll sell to china" -- yep, for exactly the same price, THEN eat the shipping - accomplishing two things -1 willing to deal with china, 2 the EPA would then free up a couple permits, and we go to burn WTI --

we are drop for you but you never lived under economic war soon you will learn that is coming both way and if we stop selling or buying and if you think it will not impact you have to be ready for surprises otherwise why do you think trump wants to start keystone xl or even taking over our country ... it is certainly for the canadians lol ... but continue to support your country and your president ... as for us we are doing the same and boycotting us products and see the impact you will feel ...

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by MLindsay:
Please tell me about the outdated weapons we have given. Again what is the limit of what we should give them. Still no answers

We gave them M1A1 Abrams tanks which had entered service with the Marine Corps in 1986; our Active units mount much newer versions.

We gave them M2A2 ODS Bradley fighting vehicles, the "ODS" indicating they were produced for Operation Desert Storm; our units are mounting versions two or three generations newer.

We gave them M113 Armored Personnel Carriers; the U.S. Army stopped buying those in 2007.

We gave them Russian MI-17 helicopters originally intended for Afghanistan before Trump surrendered that to the Taliban.

I could go on.

quote:

before Trump surrendered that to the Taliban.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by medved:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
I want to be REALLY honest with you --
the loses from tourism, outside a very FEW "destination" cities, is meaningless -- less than the burden for supporting say, 130k illegals (NYC has the data) and the self-deportation already done (generally headed south) will save the US more than the tourist loss.

I think the trade war with canada is madness, but the BEST outcome of a protected trade war between us is that canada gets in a few good shots, and destroys their economy -- meanwhile, a couple extra ULCC pull up in the gulf, and there's next to zero impacts to the gas prices .. and if we wanna fight about cars, the us has more than a few mothballed plants that would take the jobs --

Sorry, canada can't win this, but they can contain it

"we'll sell to china" -- yep, for exactly the same price, THEN eat the shipping - accomplishing two things -1 willing to deal with china, 2 the EPA would then free up a couple permits, and we go to burn WTI --

we are drop for you but you never lived under economic war soon you will learn that is coming both way and if we stop selling or buying and if you think it will not impact you have to be ready for surprises otherwise why do you think trump wants to start keystone xl or even taking over our country ... it is certainly for the canadians lol ... but continue to support your country and your president ... as for us we are doing the same and boycotting us products and see the impact you will feel ...

dude, in the balance of trade, to which party would be hurt the most from a total 'blockade" -- it's a pretty easy answer

it's STUPID that this admin would push the issue, it's also not very bright to think that Canada could "win" - other than us not having active alum ore to metal refineries, there's not much that the us couldn't close ranks and move on from, and in 6-18 months the wound would be healed over and more US people would be employeed

PROOF?
Apple is building a 6 acre factory in houston to pull manf back to the US, and will be investing 1/2TTTTTRILLION in manf in the US in the next 24 months -

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
I’m told that incredibly stupid “why aren’t you wearing a suit” attack came from Marjorie Taylor Greens shack up.

That whole debacle was embarrassing, but revealing. The Trump White House didn’t make any effort whatever to conceal casting their lot with Putin.

But Musk wearing a tee-shirt and ball cap in the Oval Office and Cabinet meetings is fine.

There is a bit of difference......Musk is there working for the American people and I don't believe he's getting paid...... Zelensky was there to ask for help....

Now, me, I think anyone in the oval office should be dressed appropriately.....

Seriously Jim, if the best defense of an indefensible meeting you can muster is that the person was not dressed appropriately, you need to just concede that the meeting was a disaster.

By the way, here is Musk at the Cabinet meeting. Gotta love the ball cap and prank T-shirt. Nothing like showing respect and deference for the occasion and the meeting.

Respect?

In a room with Trump in it??


Hahahaha!

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Never said you were nothing, that's polar thinking 0 i said you can't win a trade war that won't "Be forgotten" in 6-18 months --

alcoa still has the alum factories, they are just mothballed -- GM still has stamping and building plants.. same condition ..

and after jobama's inflation, would we really notice?

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
I just hope it's much ado about nothing .. Canadians are our "brothers" -- and in my case, a BUNCH of cousins .. and there's never so remote a cousin that they aren't still family -- (Lopin, Wind and Truth.. if you know, you know)

a trade ware with canada is stupid .. the BEST outcome is tariff free flow of goods, but it wouldn't move the needle .. it's not like 15 million illegals came over the NORTHERN border

why aren't the plants operating? reduced labor costs in Canada and Mexico - raise the barrier, and "government motors" reopens the plants, hires american workers, at higher, but less than tariffed wages -- it's pretty brutal, but simple

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Peter Zeihan releases his videos delayed outside of Patreon. So this one dropped today from before the Oval Office shitshow.

Its interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV82poPUJO0

Including the part about how damaging Vance has been so far and to keep him away form any negotiations.

quote:

The only losses will be the average American and Canadian trying to live the promise of capitalism and liberalism strangled by unfettered jackasses.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

The only losses will be the average American and Canadian trying to live the promise of capitalism and liberalism strangled by unfettered jackasses.

The difference is that the Americans will deserve it.

quote:

What Vance did yesterday, in Hollywood terms, is called "The Stranger in the Room." Screenwriters, especially, are well aware of the role of The Stranger in the Room. The Stranger in the Room is anyone in a meeting who is just there "as a friend," someone who has no creative authority on, and no stake in, the project being discussed, anyone in the room who is a last-minute addition. Sometimes it's a 20-something intern, sometimes it's an executive from a sister office, sometimes it's someone from marketing, sometimes it's an older, more experienced producer who's lending a hand for a day.

Example: I was once pitching a legacy reboot project to a legendary producer, a real lion of the industry. His 22-year-old daughter was also in the room. She interrupted my pitch to say "Right, but we don't want, like, any conflict in the movie."

The purpose of The Stranger in the Room is to destroy the project. The Stranger in the Room is the one who, after the writer and producer and director have all agreed on the direction of the story, says "How will that play in China?" or "This sounds a lot like [movie X]" or "But isn't this movie really about love?"

The Stranger in the Room is always, always there at the behest of the most powerful person in the room. Whether the Stranger understands it or not, they are acting on the behalf of the studio, and it is the studio's natural desire to say "no," because no one has ever gotten fired for saying "no," and Hollywood executives, more than anything else, spend their entire careers terrified they're going to lose their jobs for saying "yes."

But they don't want to be disliked by creatives, so instead of saying "no," they bring in a friend, either a protege or an ally from another department, or just grab someone from the hallway, a producer on another project, and ask them to sit in on the meeting. They don't know what they're looking for, they hear a hundred pitches a day, they don't know what, if anything, will please their bosses, so they bring in an ally to get another viewpoint, any viewpoint, on the project, so that they can then say "no" without looking like an asshole. Instead, they can say "Yes, that's a good point, we have to keep in mind the China market," or "Yeah, this DOES sound a lot like [movie X] now that I hear it out loud," or "Yeah, what about love? We're forgetting all about love, why isn't your action movie pitch really about love?"

And then, suddenly, the balance in the room shifts. Suddenly, a collaboration, a negotiation as it were, becomes an argument. Where, just moments earlier, everyone was agreeing on how awesome the project sounded, now, suddenly, the creatives are on one side and the suits are on the other, and the meeting becomes a power struggle, one the creatives can only lose, because the suits have the money and the creatives only have the art.

So, in Hollywood terms, Zelenskyy was the writer/director/producer, Trump was studio executive terrified of losing his job, and Vance was the disinterested ally brought in to bring up some random point that would turn the negotiation into an argument that the writer/director/producer cannot possibly win. I'll leave it up to you to figure out who studio head is.

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:
Trump is trying to end the war like it or not
It’s complicated for sure but what’s t/he alternative?
Sending more money for military and keep the war going for 10 years?
Seems a waste

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:
Trump is trying to end the war like it or not
It’s complicated for sure but what’s t/he alternative?
Sending more money for military and keep the war going for 10 years?
Seems a waste

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:
Trump is trying to end the war like it or not
It’s complicated for sure but what’s t/he alternative?
Sending more money for military and keep the war going for 10 years?
Seems a waste

He is trying to end the war by compelling the victim to capitulate. He is pressurising the victim to give up whilst putting no pressure on the aggressor to give up or concede anything whatsoever.

The victim on this case is a democracy whilst the aggressor is an authoritarian dictatorship.

Are you actually ok with this?

Trump doesn’t care that Russia removes Ukrainian kids from their families in areas it has taken and ‘reassigns’ them to Russian families and gives them new Russian passports. He just wants to be able to say I ended the war.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
You do understand America is split down the middle on Trumpism, and recent polls show a slipping approval rate?

Some of us do not approve at all with what Trump is doing. But we already expressed our disapproval when we voted for the other candidate, who lost. We warned people to pay attention to what he was saying during the election. And what kind of man he is.

Lots of people ignored the warning. I think a lot of Americans don't pay much attention to what the blowhard says. They should have.

Don't know what else I can do, short of joining a revolution.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
But we already expressed our disapproval when we voted for the other candidate, who lost....
Don't know what else I can do, short of joining a revolution.

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:
Trump is trying to end the war like it or not
It’s complicated for sure but what’s t/he alternative?
Sending more money for military and keep the war going for 10 years?
Seems a waste

He is trying to end the war by compelling the victim to capitulate. He is pressurising the victim to give up whilst putting no pressure on the aggressor to give up or concede anything whatsoever.

The victim on this case is a democracy whilst the aggressor is an authoritarian dictatorship.

Are you actually ok with this?

Trump doesn’t care that Russia removes Ukrainian kids from their families in areas it has taken and ‘reassigns’ them to Russian families and gives them new Russian passports. He just wants to be able to say I ended the war.

quote:

Sending more money for military and keep the war going for 10 years?

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
An interesting perspective.

https://www.facebook.com/photo...&set=a.1441941285661

quote:

What Vance did yesterday, in Hollywood terms, is called "The Stranger in the Room." Screenwriters, especially, are well aware of the role of The Stranger in the Room. The Stranger in the Room is anyone in a meeting who is just there "as a friend," someone who has no creative authority on, and no stake in, the project being discussed, anyone in the room who is a last-minute addition. Sometimes it's a 20-something intern, sometimes it's an executive from a sister office, sometimes it's someone from marketing, sometimes it's an older, more experienced producer who's lending a hand for a day.

Example: I was once pitching a legacy reboot project to a legendary producer, a real lion of the industry. His 22-year-old daughter was also in the room. She interrupted my pitch to say "Right, but we don't want, like, any conflict in the movie."

The purpose of The Stranger in the Room is to destroy the project. The Stranger in the Room is the one who, after the writer and producer and director have all agreed on the direction of the story, says "How will that play in China?" or "This sounds a lot like [movie X]" or "But isn't this movie really about love?"

The Stranger in the Room is always, always there at the behest of the most powerful person in the room. Whether the Stranger understands it or not, they are acting on the behalf of the studio, and it is the studio's natural desire to say "no," because no one has ever gotten fired for saying "no," and Hollywood executives, more than anything else, spend their entire careers terrified they're going to lose their jobs for saying "yes."

But they don't want to be disliked by creatives, so instead of saying "no," they bring in a friend, either a protege or an ally from another department, or just grab someone from the hallway, a producer on another project, and ask them to sit in on the meeting. They don't know what they're looking for, they hear a hundred pitches a day, they don't know what, if anything, will please their bosses, so they bring in an ally to get another viewpoint, any viewpoint, on the project, so that they can then say "no" without looking like an asshole. Instead, they can say "Yes, that's a good point, we have to keep in mind the China market," or "Yeah, this DOES sound a lot like [movie X] now that I hear it out loud," or "Yeah, what about love? We're forgetting all about love, why isn't your action movie pitch really about love?"

And then, suddenly, the balance in the room shifts. Suddenly, a collaboration, a negotiation as it were, becomes an argument. Where, just moments earlier, everyone was agreeing on how awesome the project sounded, now, suddenly, the creatives are on one side and the suits are on the other, and the meeting becomes a power struggle, one the creatives can only lose, because the suits have the money and the creatives only have the art.

So, in Hollywood terms, Zelenskyy was the writer/director/producer, Trump was studio executive terrified of losing his job, and Vance was the disinterested ally brought in to bring up some random point that would turn the negotiation into an argument that the writer/director/producer cannot possibly win. I'll leave it up to you to figure out who studio head is.

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
Best line of the morning -

“That meeting was between a man without a suit and a suit without a man”.

quote:

Originally posted by Penetrater:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/...NH8O0Lwik&__tn__=H-R

But Musk wearing a tee-shirt and ball cap in the Oval Office and Cabinet meetings is fine. What a bunch of self serving ASS KISSING WIMPS ,,But Hay,,,WE Will Always have " The Gulf of America " to serve as the Butt of all Map jokes from now on.

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
Best line of the morning -

“That meeting was between a man without a suit and a suit without a man”.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
I missed it. Any punches thrown?

Some of us work but it looks like a lot of you who have posted do not. I have a busy farm which after reading some of this it reminds me why I don't have a heard of nanny goats. It's because they stand at the fence screaming all day for more food while they ignore the lush grazing inside the fence.

It sounds to me that zelinskyy reneged on his minerals deal and was trying to get more money and American troops. He cannot win this war as is unless other countries do his fighting. Not going to happen far as I can see. Also, the American people, by and large, are tired of sending billions of THEIR dollars to a country that has never done a thing for them. So I am glad trump stood up to him, drama notwithstanding.

Ewwwekrane had a chance with the minerals deal and zeeeelinskyyy got greedy. Time to get him off the teat. That said, I bet he comes around and does as trump wants.

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
I’m confused. What’s the “security” Zelenskyy is demanding before he accepts a ceasefire. Zelenskyy is adamant that there be a 100% withdrawal to pre 2014 boundaries, financial reparations and an armed NATO force in residence. He’s trying to draw three cards to an inside straight. Trump pointed to the futility of that, but Zelenskyy is doubling down. He’s fought a courageous holding action but Russia knows all about wars of attrition. Even as a Marine, I learned that discretion is the better part of valor.

Somebody tell me the Euro or Democrat’s plan and how they’re better than Trump’s .
The elephant in the room is Putin’s nuclear stockpile. Does anyone believe he won’t use it if the U.S. tries to force out Russia from captured territory. Sanctions…. A joke. Europe is still paying Russia for fuel. Those monies are supporting/financing the killing of Ukrainians.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by MLindsay:
Fuck you Jines, Trump is no saviour! I just want to know what we should give to them, is there a limit!

The U.S. is giving money away like there is no limit, with no and I mean NO monitoring.

I have answered that question on here many times as to a limit. This Administration is seeking to force Ukraine into all the concessions w no security agreement. That will only mean Russia will come eat the rest of Ukraine on 4-5 years, then more of Europe.

Russia has to withdraw from mainland Ukraine, period, not negotiable.

Otherwise. give Ukraine whatever it says it needs to kill Russians until the Christian Messiah comes back.

In exchange, Ukraine and the West recognize Crimea as Russian.


Ukraine is not permitted into NATI, but is permitted into the EU.

Western troops shall not be stationed in Ukraine.

The sanctions removed w assets reinstated.

Otherwise, no deal and the west removes Russia from the international community making them a nation the West does not do business with.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Judge

Please go back to the agreement between the US, Western countries and Yeltsin when they disarmed Ukraine, Belarus etc of thei nuclear weapons.

What was the guarantee?

Zelensky is asking for nothing more than adherence to those terms.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Judge

Please go back to the agreement between the US, Western countries and Yeltsin when they disarmed Ukraine, Belarus etc of thei nuclear weapons.

What was the guarantee?

Zelensky is asking for nothing more than adherence to those terms.

The Budapest Accord was never ratified. There was no guarantee.
Further, I'd of lied, sneaked and cheated like a mofo to get those Soviet nukes out of the hands of any and all of the former USSR republics. The Soviet stockpile left after the collapse of the USSR belonged to Ukraine no more than it did to east Germany or the Moon.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
All military aid halted.

Very sad day.