Potus ???

[Big J]

16 minutes ago, Johnsond said:

All well and good, nothing you have said is new or has not been said before, and your solution is ?? 
 

 

Just because I don't have a solution doesn't mean that the solution is total capitulation. 

 

But if I were in any kind of position to influence negotiations, I would (as I said recently) suggest that Ukraine exchange Crimea and parts of Donetsk and Luhansk for an immediate end to the war and EU and Nato membership. 

Russia cannot be trusted not to regroup and invade again, and in theory, NATO membership ought to discourage that. But given that Trump is exhibiting little to no interest in Europe or world peace, the chances of him honouring Article 5 are very small indeed

 

I realise that it's an idealistic stand to take, but countries ought to be able to exist without the threat of other countries invading them. I do not think that being against such actions is unreasonable.

[Steven P]

'idealistic stance'.. if you don't start your negotiations with your ideal, or better, you are always going to get shafted.

 

Don't start with realistic in case your opposition won't budge unless you do, and then you are getting double shafted. Never start with their ideal position in the hope they will just say "OK" - they will use that as a starting position to gain more concessions.

 

"Roll over and surrender" gets negotiated as "Roll over, surrender, give up the territory and also pay reparations for the invaders losses" after negotiations.

[Johnsond]

7 minutes ago, Big J said:

 

Just because I don't have a solution doesn't mean that the solution is total capitulation. 

 

But if I were in any kind of position to influence negotiations, I would (as I said recently) suggest that Ukraine exchange Crimea and parts of Donetsk and Luhansk for an immediate end to the war and EU and Nato membership. 

Russia cannot be trusted not to regroup and invade again, and in theory, NATO membership ought to discourage that. But given that Trump is exhibiting little to no interest in Europe or world peace, the chances of him honouring Article 5 are very small indeed

 

I realise that it's an idealistic stand to take, but countries ought to be able to exist without the threat of other countries invading them. I do not think that being against such actions is unreasonable.

Being reasonable has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Unfortunately this ain’t fantasy football J it’s real life and death. 
Just as in 1939 🤷‍♂️idealism is all well

and good but counts for nothing, a strong deterrent ie well funded and equipped armed forces are the best option a country can have. The world’s a dangerous place J and unfortunately human beings can be the worst of all species. 

[Johnsond]

3 minutes ago, Steven P said:

'idealistic stance'.. if you don't start your negotiations with your ideal, or better, you are always going to get shafted.

 

Don't start with realistic in case your opposition won't budge unless you do, and then you are getting double shafted. Never start with their ideal position in the hope they will just say "OK" - they will use that as a starting position to gain more concessions.

 

"Roll over and surrender" gets negotiated as "Roll over, surrender, give up the territory and also pay reparations for the invaders losses" after negotiations.

Solution? 

 

[GarethM]

Their general solution is run off crying to mummy, then remember Donald in all scenarios is mummy.

 

So suck it up buttercup, unless they have a better solution. As from my memory of history the French don't really have much experience of winning or negotiating.

[Big J]

6 hours ago, Johnsond said:

Being reasonable has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Unfortunately this ain’t fantasy football J it’s real life and death. 
Just as in 1939 🤷‍♂️idealism is all well

and good but counts for nothing, a strong deterrent ie well funded and equipped armed forces are the best option a country can have. The world’s a dangerous place J and unfortunately human beings can be the worst of all species. 

 

People are mostly awful, I've found. One of the reasons I really enjoy living in the middle of nowhere in Sweden and not really having to talk to anyone

Showing my naivity, I honestly thought that the world was beyond this sort of imperialistic shite. We're in a period of regression.

[Johnsond]

1 hour ago, Big J said:

 

People are mostly awful, I've found. One of the reasons I really enjoy living in the middle of nowhere in Sweden and not really having to talk to anyone

Showing my naivity, I honestly thought that the world was beyond this sort of imperialistic shite. We're in a period of regression.

Yeah I’d not disagree with any of that. We look to be heading for a period of might  is right. One of the saving graces to come out of WW2 was it left us with people and politicians who had experienced the horrors of war, hence the desire never to go there again. Sadly not many have nowadays. 

Edited Thursday at 06:10 by Johnsond

[Big J]

2 hours ago, Johnsond said:

Yeah I’d not disagree with any of that. We look to be heading for a period of might  is right. One of the saving graces to come out of WW2 was it left us with people and politicians who had experienced the horrors of war, hence the desire never to go there again. Sadly not many have nowadays. 

 

I really don't think it's any coincidence that this period of history looks to repeat itself precisely as the last of the WW2 generation dies. What collectively short memories we have.

[Yournamehere]

It was on the news today that, apparently, in 1938, Germany invaded part of what was then Czechoslovakia and afterwards, because Germany said that they wouldn't invade any further, Germany was allowed to keep the part that they had invaded to ensure a long-term, peaceful ending.

They'll probably say how that worked out on the news tomorrow. Let's hope these invading countries are led by honest and decent men of integrity.

I'm sure it will be fine.

[GarethM]

9 minutes ago, Yournamehere said:

It was on the news today that, apparently, in 1938, Germany invaded part of what was then Czechoslovakia and afterwards, because Germany said that they wouldn't invade any further, Germany was allowed to keep the part that they had invaded to ensure a long-term, peaceful ending.

They'll probably say how that worked out on the news tomorrow. Let's hope these invading countries are led by honest and decent men of integrity.

I'm sure it will be fine.

It was on the BBC because New Zealand fired their UK envoy over his remarks.

 

Maybe remember a little Corsican emperor had a bit of a wanderlust that took him most of the way to Moscow and Egypt, similar idea of an Austrian painter.

 

It's hardly news, there are reasons islands tend to be peaceful places.