February 28Feb 28 4 hours ago, Lord Ratner said: until they don't have any money to spend. Every developed nation is basically broke, with collapsing demographics. But also, AI potentially replacing lots and lots of office work. The future is weird.
February 28Feb 28 28 minutes ago, Banzai said: On the left is what was “released,” on the right is what has been in the public sphere the last eight years. And here are some of the totally unscripted twitter comments from the influencers that for some reason were chosen to receive the files. Apparently cuz they would lie about transparency
March 1Mar 1 You lost me when you posted The Atlantic…you’d be hard pressed to find three (if any) positive articles they’ve written about Trump over the last 2 years.
March 1Mar 1 You lost me when you posted The Atlantic…you’d be hard pressed to find three (if any) positive articles they’ve written about Trump over the last 2 years.Probably indicative of the subject. TASS may be more your jam, if that’s your criteria.
March 1Mar 1 49 minutes ago, SurelySerious said: Probably indicative of the subject. TASS may be more your jam, if that’s your criteria. Nah, just pointing out bias in the highest order. It would be no different if I posted a Breitbart article being negative towards Biden. But if you don’t think The Atlantic is severely biased against Trump then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
March 1Mar 1 Nah, just pointing out bias in the highest order. It would be no different if I posted a Breitbart article being negative towards Biden. But if you don’t think The Atlantic is severely biased against Trump then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.I don’t care enough about The Atlantic to notice one way or the other. I do value Garry Kasparov’s opinion on oligarch-based authoritarianism.
March 1Mar 1 3 hours ago, SurelySerious said: I don’t care enough about The Atlantic to notice one way or the other. I do value Garry Kasparov’s opinion on oligarch-based authoritarianism. He’s done a few episodes with Preet Bhara’s podcast, Stay Tuned. Here is his latest one which was right after the election. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/stay-tuned-with-preet/id1265845136?i=1000677749919
March 1Mar 1 6 hours ago, 17D_guy said: So how about that Oval Office meeting? The one Zelensky fucked up? I'm one of the more pro-funding-Ukraine people here, but that was an absolute dumpster fire. What did he think his job at that meeting was? Just because your flag is raised to the same height doesn't make you peers with the US. He knew the starting positions of Trump and Vance, and he should have known Trump's disposition towards flatter, and he decided to press. I'm not saying he's factually wrong, but his job at that meeting wasn't to be the debate champion. I wish this was just Trump playing 4D chess to get the Europeans to take over funding Ukraine, but it's not. Trump's first impeachment made Zelensky the enemy, and he's looking for any reason to embarrass him. Zelensky failed the test. However the end result may still be that the Europeans finally take ownership of their sphere of influence.
March 1Mar 1 1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said: I wish this was just Trump playing 4D chess to get the Europeans to take over funding Ukraine, but it's not. Trump's first impeachment made Zelensky the enemy, and he's looking for any reason to embarrass him. Zelensky failed the test. However the end result may still be that the Europeans finally take ownership of their sphere of influence. I also highly doubt this was some 4D chess move from Trump, but it's amazing how it might finally get the ball rolling on his original strategic objective: To get Europe to start funding their own defense
March 1Mar 1 Author 56 minutes ago, blueingreen said: I also highly doubt this was some 4D chess move from Trump, but it's amazing how it might finally get the ball rolling on his original strategic objective: To get Europe to start funding their own defense I have a feeling that what whatever the negotiations so far were too favorable for Russia and Z saw little/no part to keep Russia at bay, hence the history lesson. So maybe Z/advisors felt that putting that out there was worth the risk to tell the world that Putin doesn't stop. Z knows US arms are done for, so he needs EU to step up. In their minds, deterrence must be more than Putin signing a paper that he'll behave. Did Z expect to get both barrels in the chest in public? I agree that the undiplomatic display probably helps Z with getting the EU to step up, because that was really Z's only play left. The sad part is the rest of the world saw that. How does any other nation work with the US on international affairs?
March 2Mar 2 21 hours ago, SurelySerious said: Probably indicative of the subject. TASS may be more your jam, if that’s your criteria. a sign you're losing the intellectual argument is when you have nothing to offer but "well you're a putin agent" drivel it isn't adding anything to the conversation and very childish.
March 2Mar 2 a sign you're losing the intellectual argument is when you have nothing to offer but "well you're a putin agent" drivel it isn't adding anything to the conversation and very childish.That’s rich.
March 2Mar 2 47 minutes ago, BashiChuni said: A good summary By a guy who lost his investments in Russia and now takes money from the Kremlin? That’s rich—even coming from you.
March 2Mar 2 1 hour ago, chase said: By a guy who lost his investments in Russia and now takes money from the Kremlin? That’s rich—even coming from you. by a guy with 11 posts and no evidence of said claim? very rich. again your side throws insults with no historical facts, content, or evidence. might be a clue that you're being deceived. how about you address the points mr. sachs made? any rebuttals to his claims? or just insults? Edited March 2Mar 2 by BashiChuni
March 2Mar 2 On 3/1/2025 at 8:18 AM, 17D_guy said: So how about that Oval Office meeting? Possibly one of the most transparent demonstrations of high stakes diplomatic negotiation that’s ever been available to the public. It had the feel of a meeting that should have been behind closed doors. So why wasn’t it? We can assume that both sides were blundering fools who allowed their emotions to take over. Or, they knew exactly what they were doing. So, what would be the desired outcomes from such a public display? What were the realized outcomes. Putin certainly watched the interchange. He’s probably going to come away from it willing to allow Trump to be an impartial arbitrator. Z comes away staying true to his position, and not undermining the faith of his people. He fought valiantly for the Biden status quo, and lost. Which sends a clear message to anyone who benefits from the status quo (most of Europe) that they’re not getting any more free chicken from the US. Z gained incredible negotiating power with European leaders. He also gets access to some creative peace solutions if the rare earth minerals deal ever gets realized. Trump gets to stay true to his campaign promises, and further separate himself from Biden. He also gets to avoid direct provocation of large scale US conflict. Vance gets yet another opportunity, as Trump’s successor apparent, to demonstrate a hardline diplomatic posture, putting American outcomes first. So, they may all be fools. Or, we might find ourselves looking back on this event as an inflection point in the path to peace.
March 2Mar 2 1 minute ago, BashiChuni said: by a guy with 11 posts and no evidence of said claim? very rich. again your side throws insults with no historical facts, content, or evidence. might be a clue that you're being deceived. Right into personally attacking me, huh? I never implied I’m not on your side, whatever that is. The guy is literally a talking head on Russian-paid state TV.
March 2Mar 2 15 minutes ago, chase said: Right into personally attacking me, huh? I never implied I’m not on your side, whatever that is. The guy is literally a talking head on Russian-paid state TV. Standing by for ANY facts or discussion about the conflict and way forward…
March 2Mar 2 Author 13 minutes ago, BashiChuni said: by a guy with 11 posts and no evidence of said claim? very rich. again your side throws insults with no historical facts, content, or evidence. might be a clue that you're being deceived. how about you address the points mr. sachs made? any rebuttals to his claims? or just insults?
March 2Mar 2 You guys have nothing but an emotional argument. Emotional arguments don’t hold up to logical, reason based facts. Sad.
March 2Mar 2 19 minutes ago, BashiChuni said: You guys have nothing but an emotional argument. Emotional arguments don’t hold up to logical, reason based facts. Sad. Or, arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You just knock over all the pieces, shit on the board, and strut around like you won the match. There are more interesting people to converse with here. Though you are occasionally amusing.
March 2Mar 2 Please keep us updated, @SurelySerious @Sua Sponte. What a predicament. On 2/27/2025 at 3:17 PM, Sua Sponte said: First, the DoD said to hold off responding. Second, federal employees don’t work for Elon. How about you send me five bullet of what you did last week so I can run it through AI and have it determine if you should be fired from your job. On 2/27/2025 at 2:54 PM, SurelySerious said: Bullshit. It’s just utter stupidity phishing to waste millions of people’s time. Like every bad manager in the AF that steals time for total nonsense. https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1896280128432623774 Edited March 2Mar 2 by gearhog
Create an account or sign in to comment