The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Inside Trump's angry Paris trip: Tantrums, sleepless nights and rants at staff

As he jetted to
Paris
last Friday, President Donald Trump received a congratulatory phone call aboard Air Force One. British Prime Minister Theresa May was calling to celebrate the Republican Party's wins in the midterm elections - never mind that Democrats seized control of the House - but her appeal to the American president's vanity was met with an ornery outburst.

Mr Trump berated Ms May for Great Britain not doing enough in his assessment to contain Iran. He questioned her over Brexit and complained about the trade deals he sees as unfair with European countries. Ms May has endured Mr Trump's churlish temper before, but still her aides were shaken by his especially foul mood, according to US and European officials briefed on the conversation.

For Mr Trump, that testy call set the tone for five days of fury - evident in his splenetic tweets and described in interviews with 14 senior administration officials, outside Trump confidants and foreign diplomats, many of whom requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Click to expand...

More:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...terms-twitter-midterm-elections-a8632746.html
 
He must've thought she was taking the mick, congratulating him on the midterms.
 
Drifter said:
Inside Trump's angry Paris trip: Tantrums, sleepless nights and rants at staff



More:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...terms-twitter-midterm-elections-a8632746.html
Click to expand...


This was posted above in a Tweet. To be honest, it's nothing new at all. It's just your standard Trump bullshit which if it was anyone else, or a leader of another country then it would be enough to get them removed from office. This being Trump is just standard now tbh.

Let's break it down...

Arguing with May over Brexit. That's simple, he wanted the UK out but I bet he can't explain why? Unless it was on Putin's wish list. There is no fecking way on this earth he would even begin to understand the complexities involved in leaving the EU. If nearly half the country couldn't work it out or see it, then there's no way Trump could. He still doesn't understand the difference between the UK and Great Britain ffs.

As for Iran, he's just pissed May and Made in haven't sided with him over the deal and have actually gone against him. He wants a war and expected us to back him up no matter what. We have thankfully learned from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The rest is just typical Trump insanity and narcissism. Doesn't realise not turning up to commemorate war heroes will be bad optics? Fml. Yet he campaigned on loving the military. Like with the California fires, he doesn't think before he comments then has to backtrack like a muthafecka!
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I'm ambivalent and have not come to a conclusion on Nato. However I'm leaning towards this as just a US spearheaded power projection.

Isn't a EU army Merkel and Macron wants, literally NATO minus America? What else is the difference?
Click to expand...
No. Every European country has it’s own individual army but the EU want to have them all co-ordinated under central leadership. (The EU want everything in every European country to be under their total control eventually). They would still be part of NATO.

Canada and Turkey are also NATO members, as well as the USA.
 
There’s quite a few obvious flaws with NATO.

It’s existence and expansion will pretty much ensure Russian hostility regardless of who is in power. It was an innately anti-Russian alliance. It should have been disbanded/replaced with the collapse of communism when the opportunity was there. Instead there were apparent agreements which have since been broken – It will always be a wedge in relations, whether they’re currently desirable is irrelevant.

Then you have the commitment to defending attacked nations regardless of government or ideology with vague terminology over what constitutes an attack. Erdogan’s Turkey being the obvious undesirable ally with an aggressive foreign policy.

It’s track record is also pretty mixed – Libya being an especially disastrous campaign.
 
We in the West look at NATO as something we can do without. I'd like to hear opinion from those countries bordering Russia and the former Soviet states.
 
A Euro army is a good idea to be honest. In a World with America, Russia and China. Europe really do need to band together, it's one of the reasons I voted Remain as I think isolating ourselves off from Europe is a pretty dismal idea.

Naturally America will be pissed at this idea because it's designed to protect itself from the Super Powers. No doubt this has probably gained more traction with Trump being in power.
 
RedSky said:
A Euro army is a good idea to be honest. In a World with America, Russia and China. Europe really do need to band together, it's one of the reasons I voted Remain as I think isolating ourselves off from Europe is a pretty dismal idea.

Naturally America will be pissed at this idea because it's designed to protect itself from the Super Powers. No doubt this has probably gained more traction with Trump being in power.
Click to expand...


Ok, but who leads a 'Euro army' ? Europe is comprised of a hell of a lot of independent nations, all with their own approaches to warfare, their own strategic goals, and their own independent cultures etc. Europe isn't a super state like the U.S or China, the nations within it have mighty histories of their own and a fierce sense of nationhood.

At best you could get close co-operation between European military forces, but one unified army? Nah.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Yay, we are back to name calling.

Trump doesn't like Nato and France/Germany want a Europe only army. Who really wants Nato?
Click to expand...
Well even in the US’ absence, NATO still wouldn’t just be a European project (the Canadians and Turks seem quite content with the status quo after all).

I suppose the more poignant question would be whether they’d be happy with a US-less NATO.
 
SquishyMcSquish said:
Ok, but who leads a 'Euro army' ? Europe is comprised of a hell of a lot of independent nations, all with their own approaches to warfare, their own strategic goals, and their own independent cultures etc. Europe isn't a super state like the U.S or China, the nations within it have mighty histories of their own and a fierce sense of nationhood.

At best you could get close co-operation between European military forces, but one unified army? Nah.
Click to expand...

I think it's inevitable that in the future European individual countries will disband and we'll have states instead and be one unified Country. It's why Brexit is a big step backwards imo. I'd also encourage the army to mix nationalities so rather than having a German unit and a French unit, you'd have units of mixed nationalities. Who leads the Army is a bit more difficult I agree, as decisions the leadership make could result in whole countries being invaded/sacrificed etc.
 
RedSky said:
I think it's inevitable that in the future European individual countries will disband and we'll have states instead and be one unified Country. It's why Brexit is a big step backwards imo. I'd also encourage the army to mix nationalities so rather than having a German unit and a French unit, you'd have units of mixed nationalities. Who leads the Army is a bit more difficult I agree, as decisions the leadership make could result in whole countries being invaded/sacrificed etc.
Click to expand...

I don't think you'll ever have a unified Europe.


Like I said before, you have too many countries with very rich, proud histories of their own. The likes of France, Britain, Spain and Italy have very unique identities which they aren't likely to give up to be part of a state they have little emotional attachment to. We've already seen sentiment in the U.K turn towards leaving the E.U, let alone if there was a question of a unified state.

The U.K spent a great deal of its history basing its continental strategy on trying to stop any one European power from getting too strong, and the nature of European history means there are deep rooted rivalries and suspicions between lots of nations.

Anywhow, this isn't really the thread for this so I'll leave it there. It's an interesting topic though.
 
Irish Jet said:
There’s quite a few obvious flaws with NATO.

It’s existence and expansion will pretty much ensure Russian hostility regardless of who is in power. It was an innately anti-Russian alliance. It should have been disbanded/replaced with the collapse of communism when the opportunity was there. Instead there were apparent agreements which have since been broken – It will always be a wedge in relations, whether they’re currently desirable is irrelevant.

Then you have the commitment to defending attacked nations regardless of government or ideology with vague terminology over what constitutes an attack. Erdogan’s Turkey being the obvious undesirable ally with an aggressive foreign policy.

It’s track record is also pretty mixed – Libya being an especially disastrous campaign.
Click to expand...
Right, it was an anti-Soviet alliance that upon the USSR’s collapse was intensified instead of reduced, which has fed directly and predictably into Russia’s antagonist stance today.

I don’t think Trump has such a nuanced stance on it though. He probably chose it as a target because it’s easy to spell.
 
Adisa said:
We in the West look at NATO as something we can do without. I'd like to hear opinion from those countries bordering Russia and the former Soviet states.
Click to expand...

Tbf youd probably be fine without nato directly. But indirectly nato provides power projection beyond actual military aspect. Nobody dares to mess with nato members, that made their bargainjng power and they can focus their cash on anything other than military
 
Adisa said:
We in the West look at NATO as something we can do without. I'd like to hear opinion from those countries bordering Russia and the former Soviet states.
Click to expand...
I sure as hell don't. NATO is incredibly important.
 
I think Trump is forcing the issue and putting NATO's future in jeopardy.

I think the discussion about an EU army has intensified simply because of China's rise to power, Russia and especially Putin's attitude and his retaking of Crimea etc and also I think a massive influence has been Trump.

The USA is acting like a rogue state and is finding a way to argue or upset nearly every country on the planet except Russia, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Trump is insane, we all know that and he clearly wants a war with Iran hence why he's so pissed at the UK and France for not siding with him and pulling out of the Iran agreement.

I think Merkel and Macron are thinking ahead and wanting protection if Trump goes full moron, or protection against another more dangerous nutter gaining power in the USA. I don't think they like being bullied or so reliant on the USA all the time and I think they want to cut the proverbial apron strings. I agree 100% and just wish they had done it sooner, I also wish we had too. I really despise being the USA's bitch and long for a Prime Minister to stand up to the USA like Hugh Grant did to Billy Bob Thornton in Love Actually.

Can't see May doing it though. Not a fecking chance.
 
RE his May bashing. I guess the Reagan Thatcher relationship is out of the window. Good job really as Thatcher would have eaten him alive as she did with Reagan many times when they were on the phone.
 
Dr4o-BXXcAAF8KQ



Not particularly relevant...just found it amusing.
 
Irish Jet said:
There’s quite a few obvious flaws with NATO.

It’s existence and expansion will regardless of who is in power. It was an innately anti-Russian alliance. It should have been disbanded/replaced with the collapse of communism when the opportunity was there. Instead there were apparent agreements which have since been broken – It will always be a wedge in relations, whether they’re currently desirable is irrelevant.

Then you have the commitment to defending attacked nations regardless of government or ideology with vague terminology over what constitutes an attack. Erdogan’s Turkey being the obvious undesirable ally with an aggressive foreign policy.

It’s track record is also pretty mixed – Libya being an especially disastrous campaign.
Click to expand...
Irish Jet said:
There’s quite a few obvious flaws with NATO.

It’s existence and expansion will pretty much ensure Russian hostility regardless of who is in power. It was an innately anti-Russian alliance. It should have been disbanded/replaced with the collapse of communism when the opportunity was there. Instead there were apparent agreements which have since been broken – It will always be a wedge in relations, whether they’re currently desirable is irrelevant.

Then you have the commitment to defending attacked nations regardless of government or ideology with vague terminology over what constitutes an attack. Erdogan’s Turkey being the obvious undesirable ally with an aggressive foreign policy.

It’s track record is also pretty mixed – Libya being an especially disastrous campaign.
Click to expand...
At this point Russia is no match militarily to western democracies. They need us more than we need them, it's just that they have an extremely cunning cnut in charge.
Their greatest weapon is manipulating the gullible and hateful idiots with propaganda. A global fairness doctrine in the media is essential and every format of news media should be subject to vigorous penalties if found to be publishing bullshit.
An extremely hard thing to do and in no way will it eliminate all the bullshit but it would certainly help in stopping the Russian secret service from convincing the voters in Michigan that Hillary runs a pedophile ring.
 
GiddyUp said:
At this point Russia is no match militarily to western democracies. They need us more than we need them, it's just that they have an extremely cunning cnut in charge.
Their greatest weapon is manipulating the gullible and hateful idiots with propaganda. A global fairness doctrine in the media is essential and every format of news media should be subject to vigorous penalties if found to be publishing bullshit.
An extremely hard thing to do and in no way will it eliminate all the bullshit but it would certainly help in stopping the Russian secret service from convincing the voters in Michigan that Hillary runs a pedophile ring.
Click to expand...
So Russia is basically the USA if you take away the word cunning.

edit: okay to be exact, you'd also have to remove the word extremely and take the letter N away from an.

But it was close.
 
Trump's bloviating on NATO is the no.1 indicator that he has and is marching to Putin's drum. NATO is Putin's nemesis, not trump's. This fat cnut probaby thought it was a charity before he wanked off to a piss show. After he was shown the recording and recieved his orders he goes after NATO in his own dumb way.
The difference between the US and other member states is a massve MIC and a hard on for wars (that they keep on loosing). Other members treat it as a deterrent and a fighting force if genocide needs to be faced and defeated. If there is anything that requires a steady course to maintain the status quo it's this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.