- Israel given carte blanche and a lot of support to bulldoze Gaza, strike at Iran, possible Iran war
- Ukraine defunded and demilitarized, probably going to sign over the occupied lands over to Russia under some "peace deal", pull out of Kursk, wait for Russia to gather its strength and come finish the job
- Russian sanctions lifted
- Elon looking to cut government spending - healthcare, subsidies, defund EPA, OSHA, FBI, other federal agencies
- Anti abortion law possibly being implemented on a federal level
Turns out if the other country decides they are altering the deal, and you don't have any leverage - the bit of paper isn't worth all that much in practice.
Would you repeat the same feat with Taiwan, if you were in Trump's place?
If Ukraine falls then the Baltics will be next - I can see Poland, France and the UK attempting to help but I suspect this would ultimately fail leading to the breakup of NATO. EU either breaks up or becomes much stronger...
Moldova first. The Kremlin have already refused to recognise the new pro-EU leader, and they've been making noises about Transnistria for a while (a similar situation to Crimea and East Ukraine).
There's a huge difference between invading a NATO member and invading a non-NATO member. And ultimately I don't think Russia has the capability to continue invading more countries with or without the US' opposition, this war has been a nonstop embarrassment for them.
If Poland France and the UK are more invested in opposing Russia then one would think that the Ukraine wouldn't be entirely reliant on the US to support it. This is the fundamental problem with the proxy war in the Ukraine, the people pushing for it talk about it as if the fate of the European continent rests on the fulcrum of the Ukraine and yet the other European countries hardly seem to care.
What do you mean? Europe has contributed twice as much to Ukraine compared to USA. Yeah, in plain military spending USA has given more, but a war isn’t won with just guns. This has been a strategy that has made sense given USAs military industrial complex, and EUs geographical proximity to Ukraine.
If USA pulls out it’s likely that EU will shift some of its aid over to military. This is already happening: European countries have started setting up arms production within Ukraine which gives Ukraine more guns per dollar spent than what donations of western built weapons does. So don’t think the dollar amount donated tells you everything about the amount of military support given.
It does insofar as the US can "decide" to betray all of its allies by ignoring its obligations under a military alliance. We've already publicly proclaimed to the entire world that the American military will come to the aid of any NATO member which is invaded. We've never had such an agreement with the Ukraine and thus owe no obligations towards them.
They aren't even going to be embarrassed - Ukraine will get a peace deal forced on it and Russia will declare a glorious victory and that will become the history that everyone remembers.
It'll take multiple years for Russia to recover and have the means to target the Baltics, by then Putin will likely kick the bucket, as he's getting up there in years and who knows what the succession would look like.
To let states decide how it should be handled, rather than a federal mandate. Allowing different possibilities to be tested - maybe in some states it will become completely illegal, maybe in others mothers will face pressure to terminate a pregnancy.
I think it's about as likely as it becoming illegal. There's too many good reasons to keep abortions even in a restricted state - even though it does open up a very messy moral can of worms.
Forgive my ignorance but I didn't realise there were states it was illegal in.
> There aren't states where terminating pregnancies is forced.
I personally don't think this could ever come from a mandated level (same as outright bans), I think instead we see it in the form of social pressure: and we can already see it across the US. An estimated 65% of abortions in the US are unwanted but the mother was heavily pressured by peers, family, work, etc. You can also see this in the downstream effects: getting an abortion raises your chances of suicide by 6x and depression by 4x.
Clinics also do not screen for coersion, the same way organ donations, adoptions, loans are all screened.
Again, should abortion be illegal because of the above? No. But it does indicate it's not as innocent as making sure women are ready/able/willing to have a child.
The only sources I can find about what you're saying is gutter something and lozier Institute, and by searching for them a bit it looks like they're catholic founded research. I'm gonna take what they say with a huge pinch of salt
> To let states decide how it should be handled, rather than a federal mandate. Allowing different possibilities to be tested - maybe in some states it will become completely illegal
Why should one get to play Laboratory of Democracy with women's lives?
I’m old enough to remember 2016 elections and the “rip usa we are doomed” predictions then. The fact is, we were ok that time, it’s gonna be ok this time too.
We ratcheted several notches farther toward high-level corruption being normal—multiple family members in high level positions, no divestment from direct control of business interests—Carter gave up control of a peanut farm to be president because to do otherwise would have been unacceptable, that’s how much has changed. Even on just that front it was extremely damaging, and that’s one thing.
> The fact is, we were ok that time, it’s gonna be ok this time too.
Trump has always wanted to be a tyrant; he has always wanted to run the country like he runs his businesses -- he says something and it's done, he makes decisions for his own personal benefit, he rewards his friends and punishes his enemies.
In 2016 he wasn't expecting to win and didn't really know what he wanted, so he appointed well-respected people from the Republican establishment. Those people believed in the constitution, the rule of law, the rules-based international order, and so on, and pushed back and refused to obey him when he wanted to act like a tyrant.
This time is different. He knows what he wants: People who will be personally loyal to him. The Republican establishment has been destroyed. The Supreme Court has officially decreed that nearly anything he does is immune from prosecution. He will have a much easier time getting his way this time than he did in 2016.
You forgot trade war against Europe and China. Also, if economists and investors are right, massive inflation. I also personally predict total war with Iran, directly or indirectly.
My biggest fear is that Trumps deterrence of CRINK countries will cause XI to miscalculate. Other than that I think this is manageable. EU will get a boost as the internal awakening materializes. As an European I had difficulty understanding why Trump was even an alternative, but I have come to realize that the Plutocratic nature of the US was causing more suffering for the people than was easily observed from here.
The US is currently in proxy war with Russia on two fronts: Ukraine and Israel/Iran. Conceding Ukraine would help Iran, which is probably not what Israel wants. The idea that Trump would be friendly to Putin -- lift sanctions, give him Ukraine -- seems like a strategical contradiction.
This seems like a reasonably good analysis, but Trump's frequent campaign promise to deport all the "illegal immigrants" seems like it might deserve a prominent mention, even if only to explain why you don't think it will happen. During the campaign, Trump often defined "illegal immigrants" as 20 million people or more, some of whom have US residency visas that Trump thinks they shouldn't have gotten and therefore aren't "illegal" in the conventional sense.
If it does happen, it will be the largest "ethnic cleansing" in human history—bigger than the Yugoslavian migrations, bigger than the Armenian genocide, bigger than the Holocaust, bigger than the Holodomor, bigger than the US's previous forced removals of Native Americans. I say "ethnic" because it's primarily directed at people who are dark-skinned because of their Native American ancestry and driven by racism against them. It isn't directed against white illegal immigrants like Elon Musk and Melania Trump were.
I kinda expect the EU to go collective defense if the US pulls out, to see if the US can still be trusted to honor its words, of if they have to write it off entirely (honestly, they should have done that before, but…)
Sadly neither candidate was going to substantively stick up for Gazan citizens. I just hope Trump's wildcardness spins the geopolitical roulette wheel to land on peace.
Ooooh, that's gonna be real interesting to see. An anti-vaxxer in charge of healthcare.
Taking fluoride away from drinking water.
Weakening vaccine research and development.
Looks like most Americans will be in for a long suffering in the coming decades.
Combine that with privatisation of health insurance and weakening Medicaid, this heavily points towards a Brexit moment for the USA.
"- Israel given carte blanche and a lot of support to bulldoze Gaza"
I agree, both parties are way to big buddy with Isreal, war with Iran I am not sure sure.
"- Russian sanctions lifted"
Ah yeah that is why Putin endorsed Kamala for that EXACT OPPOSITE reason that Trump put heavy sanctions on Russia and he did not like that.
"- Elon looking to cut government spending - healthcare, subsidies"
Any evidence of this claim? Of course not. Making government more efficient does not equal to your doomsday fears. Has Elon ever public-ally indicated and of this? I do not know his positions on this honestly but I doubt your claims. Elon is for UBI, he says the world needs it because Robots will take over, and I doubt he will support a UBI where people can not effort to pay their doctors and surgeons with. So I am calling straight BS on this.
"- Anti abortion law possibly being implemented on a federal level"
Any hint about this claim? No of course not.
"What else am i missing?" A lot actually:
- No more stupid DEI BS that is already on a downwards trend even during Biden/K
- No more castrating kids, chopping their breasts of pps of.
- No more hiding from parents that they supposedly changed their gender/pronouns or whatever they latest trendy woke sh1t it.
- No more indoctrination in education like things that you are more oppressed/valuable the more "minority" checkboxes you check. Hopefully the DEATH of wokeness.
- Less of the PURPOSEFULLY pushing illegals to vote (for dems of course). BY LAW in California they can not ask people for ID to vote. Total insanity, not sure if they can required ID federally but I hope they can and will.
- Securing the Border. Kamala flipped on this btw, as she did on plenty of others things b4. But as she noted the people actually WANT a secure border, including all the people she thought will vote for her, she suddenly claimed she wanted the same thing that was always Trumps thing and she railed against.
- Free Speech online and offline, something the real left once was championing but now they are all pro censorship of all the opinions they do not like. Simply call everything they do not like "hate-speech" and call everyone who dares to have a "right" opinion on something a nazi.
- Less regulations more economic opportunity. Something that ties into Elons government efficiency endearment I guess. What they will cut it bureaucracy and the burden to start and operate a business.
- I am sceptical of this is just a lie but Trump at least claims he is anti-war. While the left openly the war mongering 24/7. You very typically put "deal" in quotes and make it sound like a peace deal is something bad. Peace deals are incredibly good and if Trump can actually make and negotiate deals with countries instead of starting WW3 that would be great. The US needs to stop invading counties and getting involved on the globe with 700 military basis across the world ... it needs to end. And I do not think Trump will end it, but a president that will start 1 war less then the other side is still a win. And Trump is hopefully that guy. The Israel Gaza situations is bad and Trump is 100% wrong so far on this.
Us is not involved with boots on the ground. Now, try to imagine what you just said, but shift it to your country being invaded and imagine being told you're weird because you want soldiers to defend your motherland rather than giving away land
Would the US give up Alaska if Russia attacked from Siberia? I'd say the US wouldn't. Ukraine has more support from EU countries who I think will step up more now that the US has become a Nazi theocratic state.
Russia is waging a war of conquest to annex its former colonies and restore its empire. There is zero reason to believe this will stop unless it is stopped.
> What areas has the US annexed in the last 100 years?
Why stop at 100 years? Is it because the whole current USA territory is actually annexed?
FYI, here's the list of wars the US was involved into, most of them they started. I leave it as an exercise for you to count the casualties and add it up.
Is there any reason or source to anything you said, or just saying because you hate him. Specially regarding the last one, he clearly mentioned that he is against that.
I am as much against Trump as the next guy, but let's don't degrade HN conversations to this level.
> War is not good and signing peace deals is not a bad thing.
If Russia invades Alaska, do you think the average Republican will take the same sentiment? Just give him that land because otherwise lots of people will die.
> War is not good and signing peace deals is not a bad thing.
The logical conclusion of this is that we should always just surrender whenever some other army comes knocking at our door. Let Putin walk all the way to Portugal, let Kim Jong Un walk to the south tip of the Korean peninsula, because any peace deal, no matter how bad, is always better than firing a single shot.
Putin invaded Crimea and then said "I'm done". Then by proxy he invaded the Donbas, and said "I'm done". Then he invaded Ukraine. Why do you think that if we sign a peace deal with him, that he just won't build up his forces in another year or two and invade again -- either Ukraine, or one of the other Baltic countries?
At some point you have to say, "It stops here".
EDIT: Furthermore, you have to think of the knock-on effects. If we settle now in Ukraine, that won't stop war with Russia: Putin has learned that invading your neighbor is fine, and he'll do it again and again. Xi and Kim will learn the same thing, and there will be wars in Taiwan and Korea.
On the other hand, Russia is almost defeated -- another 2 years and they'll be completely out of materiel. They're already resorting to pulling in North Korean troops. Support Ukraine for another year or two, and the war will end for good -- and Xi and Kim will learn that invading your neighbor is a losing proposition, and war in Taiwan and Korea will be avoided.
> You need to understand that played a big role.
Do you have any support for this statement? I haven't heard many people bring up Ukraine as a major reason for voting Trump or not voting Harris.
Ironically, there were Arabs and progressives who failed to support Harris because she supported Israel too much, and there are Zionist Jews and Christians who support Trump because they think Kamala didn't support Israel enough. On that particular conflict I don't think there's any winning position for the Democrats.
>>>Do you have any support for this statement? I haven't heard many people bring up Ukraine as a major reason for voting Trump or not voting Harris.
Its a bad look when many citizens are hurting economically and you send billions and billions to a foreign government and then gaslight them the economy is indeed fine.
I don’t completely disagree with you (I mean, I mostly do, just not completely) but do you have reason to think the hawkishness of the Biden administration (a lot of which was inherited from the hawkish first trump administration) really influenced people? Like polls, or even surprising anecdotes?
Americans mostly don’t seem to care about foreign policy at all.
No we do get it. It’s these modern democrats that are so disconnected from the reality of the American people which is why they lost huge in this election across all racial and demographic lines. Look at NY how does it get that close?
The American people cried that the economy was bad for them and the democrat message was no it’s better than ever.
The American people said why are we sending billions to Ukraine when we need the money here. They were told we were supporting dictatorships. Just look at some of the responses to my comment here.
The American voter was concerned about the huge crime waves in the cities and the biden admin told us crime was good and made up.
The Democrat response to COVId was to shut up and take the vaccine or lose your job.
I’m surprised she didn’t lose more with all the pain biden Harris caused.
- Israel given carte blanche and a lot of support to bulldoze Gaza, strike at Iran, possible Iran war
- Ukraine defunded and demilitarized, probably going to sign over the occupied lands over to Russia under some "peace deal", pull out of Kursk, wait for Russia to gather its strength and come finish the job
- Russian sanctions lifted
- Elon looking to cut government spending - healthcare, subsidies, defund EPA, OSHA, FBI, other federal agencies
- Anti abortion law possibly being implemented on a federal level
What else am i missing?