cross-posted from: https://discuss.online/post/44708818
The United States has threatened to oppose Britain’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands if Andy Burnham does not increase defence spending, The Telegraph can reveal.
The proposal is among measures being drawn up by senior defence officials at the Pentagon as an incentive to hit Nato’s 5 per cent spending pledge.
A senior US official told The Telegraph that Britain was likely to receive “special attention” in Washington’s review of its allies’ commitment to Nato, which will examine whether member nations have credible paths toward the target.
When are the republians underneath him going to say enough is enough? We’re a long ways into batshit crazy right now.
When are the republians underneath him going to say enough is enough
When he finally improves the world by dying, they MIGHT. Depends on whether or not the cult has a new leader ready by then.
Right now the “correct” people are making money.
So…when the money runs out or if something stops the money.
This IS the plan. Canada Tariffs, renaming Lake Ontario are all distractions for more serious news about Iran, oil prices, Trump stealing from soldiers paychecks.
Picking fights with friendly allies who won’t continue the fight after he Taco’s is the shtick.
Probably when they lose the next election because of him.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!
Right? That runs through my mind so often nowadays. It’s about to the point I may just actually start taking pills so I’m fucked up enough to not notice all the fucked-up shit going on around me.
That’s stupidity working as intended.
You don’t want to even try to fix it. Your solution is to leave…mentally or otherwise.
Never,they’re either too evil or too stupid or both
voters keep rewaribg his choices in primaries etc …fuck voters.
Trump is there because America is like this, he’s a symptom.
The sooner saner countries walk away from the US en masse and group together, the better
Trump threatens ____________ over ___________.
Repeat again in a day or two.
Maxwell, Epstein?
Indeed. I wish they wouldn’t say that US this or the US that it’s not normal same thinking people it’s orange idiot clown
No other country seems to get that benefit. He is our drmocratically elected leader
People supporting him is normal in the US. 39% of the population continue to support him
We need to take a real hard look at our country and realize what we did. Trump isn’t some aberration, he’s a democratically elected leader, who got elected twice
We have a lot of structural issues that led to this, from poor education and rampant anti-intellectualism, to an electoral college that subverted the popular democratic result to bring him to power initially
Our electoral system is such that ~40% of the population will support a candidate for their party no matter how bad, simply because that’s their team, then that candidate can be elected with less than half the vote
Like a drunk trying to start a fight with the entire bar
Yes. Except the drunk is also the chief of police and the Mayor of the town.
AKA a Mississippi Tuesday
From other thread
I think this war would be awful…
But I also think it would be fucking hilarious if the US takes over those islands and doesn’t give them to Argentina. They would seethe so fucking much.
I wanna see a video of the POTUS pointing to the islands on a map.
Is this linked to the massive beef import plan from a mysterious country that I read about the other day, it trump of course it is
No one cares. US opposition or support in the falklands dispute is meaningless unless the US is going to park a carrier group there and do something about it, which they absolutely wont. So our powerless yet somehow also power mad toddler president can support or not support whoever he likes, or even better he can sit down and stfu.
iirc the last time someone parked a fleet there two destroyers were lost.
If it happens again, it would be the most excitement the local sheep population has seen since 1982.
It was a bit more than that.
Two british destroyers, two frigates, a landing ship, and a containership. One argentinian light cruiser and a submarine.
Brezhnev took Afghanistan
Begin took Beirut
Galtieri took the Union Jack
And Maggie, over lunch one day
Took a cruiser with all hands
Apparently to make him give it back
Hey Britain, Canada here…we rebuilding the empire then?
Why keep demanding NATO spend more on defense? Why choose defense spending?
More money spent on military = more tax money being funneled into the pockets of arms dealers and mercenaries who love Trump and his European far right allies = more bribes and kickbacks for the latter.
Well, for the US, trump was assuming europe would spend it on US weapons, meaning his buddies get more money.
For Europe, spending more on defense is an excellent way to break the stranglehold the US has on the defense industry, which is a good thing, since they’re extremely unreliable these days. Also, there’s literally a foreign power invading europe right now, which is a Bad Thing.
We should collectively boycot US gun sector.
Late night fever dream.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
-
No person shall be eligible for the highest office of <nation>, nor of their highest houses (‘Congress’, ‘Senate’, ‘Parliament’, or equivalent ruling body) unless they have at least one child of age eligible to serve active duty in their military at the time of attaining office, or are themselves eligible for active duty;
-
<Nation>, upon entering a state of War, declared or undeclared, incursion, ‘liberation mission’, ‘limited operation’, or any other such terms causing military operation against another nation, triggers a mandatory enlistment and deployment of ALL politicians enacting said state of conflict, and their eligible children. This shall apply to the highest and second-highest leadership, as well as those of their highest houses; for service to enter active duty immediately, to be placed on the first offensive line, and remaining on active lines of conflict until their tour of duty is fully served, or their death, whichever occurs first;
-
If the opposing nation does not have this same policy in effect, the first and foremost objective of <nation>, being in conflict with demonstrated cowards, shall be to eliminate the children of opposing cowardly nation’s leadership, followed by the cowardly leaders themselves;
-
The preceding clauses logically imply that any opposing nation should carefully consider if they are to engage in unprompted aggression against our great <nation>, and are strongly encouraged to adopt this same statute for the protection of their own leaders and their families.
This is just MAD with extra steps to allow explicit child murder.
Well, I did call it a ‘late night fever dream’.
But any politician who advocates starting war should be required to be at the front line themselves, or their of-age children, no exceptions. That would put a damper on chicken-hawks like Drumpf, who dodged service himself.
-
