Trump vs Zelensky (1 Viewer)

Let's face it the only reason for Trump's behaviour in effectively supporting Putin is to give legitimacy to his intentions to invade neighbouring countries (Greenland and Panama).
 
Yesterday's farcical Ukraine summit in London

It was as I said it would be, a total waste of time. All a publicity stunt for Starmer.
Banners outside announcing the "summit" on the 2nd March in London. Only a select few of the EU leaders, so all of those excluded now asking why. The so called meeting lasted less than two hours. To discuss a conflict running for over three years! What exactly could be sorted out in two hours? In fact all of the leaders will have spent longer getting there, or having the pat me on the back free meal afterwards, than they did chatting.

Waste of time and money and as I say just another publicity stunt for Starmer.
He did say during the election that it would be country first but what he actually meant was it would be Starmer first and his promotion.
Just as it was for Tony Bliar, Starmer is preparing for when Labour is removed from power at the next election. There is doubt that he's not bothered about the damage he does to the country, with immigration, Net Zero, inflation etc. As long as he's grifted his way into benefiting by the end of it.
 
MarkK said:
Is your argument here that the president did not look weak because someone else, IYHO, looks weaker? Pretty low standard that the president's conduct looks strong, as long as one person in the room looks weaker.
Click to expand...
No one cares about pin head democrat talking points anymore. We're after results, they are after sabotage of their political opposition and like to grasp at straws of perception in hopes the public will buy their BS. So what I see here is weak pathetic democrats whining about anything and everything to do about Trump. This was a very bad decision on Z's part. Good thing that the olive branch is still there for the taking.

The latest info that was not apparent right away, or even reported on, is that Zelensky talked to democrats just prior to this signing deal. Now what did they say to him? The trader democrats would rather have a never ending war and most likely suggested they should not sign the deal. Traitors.
 
The whole purpose of the Oval meeting on camera was to get to an actual signing of the peace deal. So anything that goes against this purpose is no good. The peanut gallery comment about Z's lack of suit wasn't helping to close the deal. The fact that Trump and Vance allowed Z to play his sympathy card for Ukraine yet again to justify the continuation of the war should have been shut down pronto. Camera's off, I (Trump) need to speak with Z in private. Unfortunately, they let him play that sympathy card on national TV so he could just decline the deal and gain more public support for continuing the war. It should have never gotten as far as it did and that's the mistake made by the WH. Hopefully, the olive branch is still on the table and Z comes to his senses and signs the deal. I think Trump left that door open which was very smart.
 
Trump should give z another chance. He should invite z back to the oval and invite the media again. Trump should say are you ready to sign? Any answer but yes Trump should walk away.
 
AccessBlaster said:
Trump should give z another chance. He should invite z back to the oval and invite the media again. Trump should say are you ready to sign? Any answer but yes Trump should walk away.
Click to expand...
I think that Trump has given Z enough chances. Problem is that Z appears to think he can dictate to the US and everyone else.
JDV mentioned he has never thanked anyone for the huge assistance. Then Z said thank you and in the next breath promptly asked for more.

One problem here is a lot of this stuff is given as a loan. But can or will Z pay anything back? He has been firing $800,000 rockets like confetti and we all know it something is free, you will use more than if you pay for it. So does he not intend to pay anything back?
 
Cotswold said:
One problem here is a lot of this stuff is given as a loan. But can or will Z pay anything back? He has been firing $800,000 rockets like confetti and we all know it something is free, you will use more than if you pay for it. So does he not intend to pay anything back?
Click to expand...
Starmer told Trump at their meeting, the money the UK gave the Ukraine was not a loan and tried to correct Trump. When Starmer got back to London the story changed. It's clearly a loan expected to be paid back.
 
The whole showing up in a tshirt, crossing his arms a lot, and bringing up things that had already been decided, and doing so in front of the cameras, was stupid on Z's part. I didn't like Vance's specific contribution, but overall I like that they are trying to hold Z to a higher standard.

Remember, a lot of people have deified Zelensky. He's no god. Previous to this war he was just an average guy and at least slightly corrupt.
The whole world has watched as 100's of 1000's of human beings have been sacrificed on the altar of "wanting to totally and decisively beat Putin". So far it couldn't be done and probably time to be open to more negotiating. Russia is a nuclear power. Trump wanting to try to bring both parties to the negotiating table - which involves placating both of them to some degree, including Putin - is very reasonable, and in fact is the only thing left to do. Security guarantees is the equivalent of saying we will go to war with Russia, which might be a pretty awful thing to do.

Neither leader is perfect. But it's time for Zelensky to be open minded to negotiating, and including his rare earth minerals. The free money can't last forever. I just looked at my paycheck, $900 in tax extracted for the Federal Government. I'm glad Trump is trying to be careful with it and extend his tax cuts, which (contrary to popular myth), don't just benefit rich people, they benefit the middle class too.

Amen. Pass the biscuits.
 
Mike Krailo said:
So what I see here is weak pathetic democrats whining about anything and everything to do about Trump. This was a very bad decision on Z's part.
Click to expand...
Same as your previous deflection, same low bar, that as long as someone else is weaker. This is called a bias, commonly held to be invisible to the holder of said bias.
 
Isaac said:
The whole showing up in a tshirt, crossing his arms a lot, and bringing up things that had already been decided, and doing so in front of the cameras, was stupid on Z's part.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the terms of the meeting were clearly defined prior to z's visit. Z had an agenda and he executed it as planned.
 
I forgot rolling his eyes. I mean the more I think about it, the more he got what he deserved - or at least, was asking for
 
MarkK said:
Same as your previous deflection, same low bar, that as long as someone else is weaker. This is called a bias, commonly held to be invisible to the holder of said bias.
Click to expand...
We all are biased Mark, that's pretty obvious. Each seeing the same thing in a different way. Nothing can change that except maybe where you get your info from. Garbage in, garbage out.
 
My Secretary is on a flight from Fla. to DC with Lady G. she just texted us. People are not being nice to him.
 
MarkK said:
Same as your previous deflection, same low bar, that as long as someone else is weaker. This is called a bias, commonly held to be invisible to the holder of said bias.
Click to expand...
No, that's not a bias. Let me explain how comparisons normally work, at least, in cases where Democrats are not desperately hoping you don't compare Trump to Biden for fear it might make their side look bad.
It’s interesting that when we compare Trump favorably to PersonA (past president, etc), we're accused of "whataboutism"—as if drawing comparisons is somehow evasive or irrelevant. But in reality, comparison is the very foundation of how we assess quality, progress, and excellence in every area of life.

We don’t judge things in a vacuum. Whether it’s evaluating athletes, employees, or even products, we naturally compare. If we say a basketball player today is better than one from a decade ago, no one scoffs and says, “It doesn’t matter what that player was like before—only focus on what you don’t like about this one.” No. We recognize that comparison provides context. It helps us measure improvement, appreciate strengths, and understand what’s changed for the better.

So when we highlight the ways in which Trump is the same, or better, or worse, than PersonA (Biden, Obama, etc) we're not avoiding a discussion—we're making an essential point: if progress matters, then so does recognizing when something is genuinely better. Ignoring comparison isn’t objectivity; it’s refusing to acknowledge the very process by which we evaluate anything at all...Stripping us, I'd say even, of the ability to evaluate in most all cases.

But I think you already knew all that. I'm just keeping my typing muscles strong.
 
moke123 said:
That's no way to go through life.

Lindsay Graham is on the plane and people are giving him shit. Is that easier to understand?
Click to expand...

Definitely easier to understand, sorry I don't frequent your liberal-satire sites to know "Lady G". (Do liberals even allow satire? That may not be a thing - whatever your version of the Babylon Bee is).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Isaac
Rational vs. irrational reporting
2 3
Replies
43
Views
915
ColinEssex
ColinEssex
Isaac
Immigration (applies to any country)
Replies
11
Views
259
Pat Hartman
P
Isaac
Are these things true?
2
Replies
20
Views
408
Pat Hartman
P
J
The real J D Vance
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
1,878
moke123
moke123
J
Another big lie
Replies
9
Views
384
Jon
Jon

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom