US Dept of Housing screens sabotaged to show deepfake of Trump sucking Elon's toes Visitors to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development's headquarters in the capital got some unpleasant viewing on Monday morning after TV screens across the building began showing a deepfake video of President Trump kissing and sucking Elon Musk's toes. The AI-generated footage had been circulating online over the …
> and resources," HUD spokesperson Kasey Lovett told The Register. "Appropriate action will be taken for all involved."
Presumably he means the waste that resulted in the apparent lack of security in his systems.
And the appropriate action will be - to whine about the evil people who did nothing more dangerous than show a not too unsafe for work video, instead of hiring in and paying for the right people to actually secure his screens.
Having a long memory for bizarre political stories, I was immediately put in mind of a certain Dick Morris, a Bill Clinton advisor
The Electronic Telegraph reported unverified claims that in order to impress Rowlands, Morris invited her to listen in on his conversations with President Clinton. It was reported that Rowlands worked for $200 an hour and that after he solicited her for sex, Morris gave Rowlands access to President Clinton's campaign speeches before they were delivered and also let her hear the President's voice during a telephone conservation. According to Rowlands, Morris had a fondness for sucking toes.1
Back in the days when $200 was worth something.
__________________
1. Had a good chat with Vladimir
2. Golf
3. Golf
4. Analysed a report from Elon on the amount of fraud and corruption there is amongst employees tasked with welcoming guests at the White House. Studied a more interesting report from Sergey on how it would be beneficial to America, my bank account and businesses, to declare myself king and impose a dictatorship. Sergey says there's good money in doing what Vladimir asks and the Kremlin is fully supportive. They say they can help fix the elections. WINNING!
5. Golf
That the world is a sim now. A facsimile of a forgotten world. A crime in repose. A felony of epic proportions continues to unfold like butterfly wings. A crime spree unlike anything the world has ever seen.
Big balls turned out to be an kgb descendant. No, this isn't some Thomas Hunter ramble, No drug illusion. All that I say is true. Evil does indeed, surround us. You must change your evil ways.
Every working day this week, I attended (was ordered to attend) at least one meeting per day in which:
* My butt warmed a chair;
* I drank coffee;
* I ate a doughnut;
* I propped up my supervisor's tender ego, which needs his minions/troops/peeps/entourage to surround and accompany him in his meetings; and,
* My time was wasted in discussions of subjects which in no way were connected to my job.
If you want to save money, you need to fire the people who ought to be fired. If you want to have the work done, you need to not fire the people who ought not be fired.
You can "clean house" with a flamethrower, but there will little left standing if you do so.
Maybe. However you do that by understanding first. Unfortunately M&T think you can run a country like you run a company.
You can't. There isn't an 'outside' in this scenario. For example, everyone you sack still has to eat. And reducing the federal budget does actually decrease GDP, and the tax cuts won't raise it. Everyone knows trickledown doesn't work.
The problem is also that Trump isn't the only person in charge. You aren't in a monarchy (last time I looked) so there is a process involving at least two branches of government that should be happening.
And as we know the end doesn't justify the means. There is a way to do things properly. This subversion of the process is corrupt (this is the correct word) and unless the US population reacts, the next time he'll subvert it to lock up or fire someone you love for something spurious. And then you'll wish the checks and balances worked.
Do you think the founding fathers envisaged one branch of government acting like this, unilaterally? It really is like the monarchy you left 250 years ago. One man doing what he likes and no parliament to stop him. Even the UK 250 years ago had more checks and balances.
Ok first up I believe (note 'believe' as I've never actually tried it) that you CAN run a country like a company. There are many parallels; you need a vision, a product, a sales engine, a means of producing the produce, a workforce that needs to be productive AND happy, a way of nurturing and progressing said workforce, a set of rules that govern behavior, a way to enforce those rules and more. It's just like a very big company.
Second: Trump isn't a king even if he believes he is. He needs a board of directors, answerable to the electorate, to make things happen in a sustainable way.
Third, in many cases the end DOES justify the means. It's not accurate to make this a blanket statement.
Finally, it's possible to believe (as I do) that the outcome (shaping the federal workforce into something more efficient) is correct, but the method (arbitrary hacking) is not. I also think there's a large amount of 'chop first, ask questions later' going on and this will end in tears.
I agree with much of what you say. However I do believe that he is acting in an unaccountable way. The problem is that the system doesn't make him accountable now, and his power (through patronage) is so large that the normal checks and balances that should prevent an abuse between the 'public accountability - every four years' have failed. Congress should be stopping him breaking the law. Where are they?
Regarding the 'company' matter. I totally agree that an inefficient public sector is sub-optimal - though less sub-optimal than for a company. And it is always wise to spend public money well. The issue I find is two-fold:
Firstly, the public sector has a moral duty to serve all the population - which necessarily makes it less efficient. The current approach from Trump and Musk has lost this key moral underpinning. If (as an example) you have to provide services to the 50% of people who are below average, then it requires that the services have lots of 'help' and 'cost' to allow these people to access the services. Even if they look 'inefficient'.
And I believe the US is rich enough to aspire to not have people starving (and homeless). Everyone can be dealt a bad hand, either at birth or during life.
And it isn't inefficient to prevent pandemics, or hold companies to account, or have internal audit within government itself.
Secondly, there is the 'externalities' issue. Musk just fires people on the lower end of the bell-curve in his companies. However in a country, this doesn't work. There isn't an outside void into which to cast people. Ultimately the country picks up the pieces or people starve (see the moral point above).
That, for me, is the key difference. A company RELIES on the state to provide the 'diaper'. And a company RELIES on the state to just absorbe all the trash that a company creates; unemployed people, environmental mess etc. Its not companies that pick up the pieces. Its the State that underwrites all of this.
For me this is the key difference between a Company and a Country. A country has responsibilities that transcend a political term and cover the whole of the population and a physical space.
People hand that responsibility to a State because it requires collaboration and co-ordination at a level no individual can achieve.
Companies wilfully ignore any responsibility not laid out in Law. A country picks up all the mess outside that.
But once a State begins to deny its basic responsibilities towards its population - what then? Do the population owe a duty of loyalty to it any more?
As an example, one of the basic responsibilities is to follow the law.
Secondly, there is the 'externalities' issue. Musk just fires people on the lower end of the bell-curve in his companies. However in a country, this doesn't work. There isn't an outside void into which to cast people. Ultimately the country picks up the pieces or people starve (see the moral point above).
Musk is a dedicated believer of the Eugenics movement, which has always had this problem. What do you do with the the Untermensch?
We'll see what his solution is over the next few years.
Do you think the founding fathers envisaged one branch of government acting like this, unilaterally? It really is like the monarchy you left 250 years ago. One man doing what he likes and no parliament to stop him.
Yep. Which is why the Constitution created the Executive branch, and gave the role of President pretty much absolute power over how that's managed. The Legislative can still create laws, set budgets etc but the Executive implements those laws.
>You can't. There isn't an 'outside' in this scenario. For example, everyone you sack still has to eat. And reducing the federal budget does actually decrease GDP, and the tax cuts won't raise it. Everyone knows trickledown doesn't work.
Every person affected will now be claiming social security, so increasing that cost with a decreasing number of tax payers. Every person affected will now be spending less money in bars, restaurants, hair salons, supermarkets, etc, etc.
For every person directly impacted, 10 are indirectly impacted.
And even then, I saw that NPS and the Forest Service have lost 3,000 employees as part of the cull. These are "services" that bring in roughly $5 for every $1 spent. Billions of dollars of exports (overseas tourism) and millions of jobs are at risk in the areas around the national parks and monuments as a result of this.
"Every person affected will now be claiming social security, so increasing that cost with a decreasing number of tax payers. Every person affected will now be spending less money in bars, restaurants, hair salons, supermarkets, etc, etc."
Assuming they don't find other jobs. Which the vast majority will.
"NPS and the Forest Service ... are "services" that bring in roughly $5 for every $1 spent"
Source?
I'd like you to provide a source too.
I want to know where all these millions of jobs are going to come from. Please note, they need to be roughly equivalent to the current pay levels of any sacked employees in order for the tax receipts to be roughly the same. i.e Not just jobs that miraculously appeared once you throw out all the illegal immigrants.
My source is that Humanity continues to exist. Despite what you apparently believe, most people want to work and provide for their families; jobs are created every single day, and most people will find their way back into work; as they always have done.
Re your 'Please note", no they don't. The statement I was refuting was "Every person affected will now be claiming social security"; which would be inaccurate if even one single person made redundant from Federal employ found their way into a new job; it's not dependent on any particular pay construction you decide you want to construct in your active little imagination.
Please note, they need to be roughly equivalent to the current pay levels of any sacked employees in order for the tax receipts to be roughly the same.
Nope, not necessarily because there are wooden dollars. So a federal employee gets $100k a year. That pay comes from taxation and they pay say, $40k in taxes, so the nett cost to the taxpayer is still $60k. If the ex-federal worker gets any job in the private sector, any tax paid is a net gain to the Treasury. If they can't find a job on an equivalent salary, that suggests that maybe they weren't worth their pay. As for job creation, that depends on whether Trump's 'America First' strategy works, and jobs that were offshored, eg-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce980m2xv30o
Apple plans to invest more than $500bn (£396bn) in the US over the next four years, starting with a new advanced manufacturing factory in Texas.
The tech giant said it expected to create 20,000 new jobs over that time, with the "vast majority" of roles in research and development, software and artificial intelligence (AI).
If those jobs are really created, then ex-federal employees may want to consider retraining to fill those positions.
> you CAN run a country like a company ... It's just like a very big company
> find other jobs. Which the vast majority will.
So, you are running your country as though it is a company and sack a load of people; that isn't any kind of problem because "the vast majority will (find other jobs)".
In other words, you expect all those sacked people to leave the country (your company) because they ain't welcome in *your* country no more.
"In other words, you expect all those sacked people to leave the country (your company) because they ain't welcome in *your* country no more."
Says who? They're very welcome to stay and find other jobs, in fact we hope they do; because we need their expertise, just not in the job they're currently doing.
It's the same in many (most?) companies at the moment. They tell people their jobs are being made redundant, give them a fixed period of time to find a new job, and if not then they end up on benefits.
You really missed the point, didn't you?
Your country is run as ONE company. Getting fired is getting kicked out of that one company (country).
You couldn't even figure out that in your analogy, if the people weren't sent out of the country then the equivalent would be to transfer them to another section of the single company (country) or put them on company (country) dole.
Now, now many real companies move their unwanted to another section? How many run a dole?
Your analogy of "a country can be run like a company" is so weak even you can not see how it works!
Rather, how it doesn't.
They're being let go from one "business unit" of the "company". They are free to find a job in another business unit (another Government entity or in the private sector) where their skills ARE required, or they can sign on for benefits if nothing is available. Nobody's asking or expecting them to leave the "company" - a.k.a. country.
The analogy works. Which you would see if you spent more time trying to understand and less time trying to think up playground insults.
> They are free to find a job in another business unit (another Government entity or in the private sector)
In your analogy, if an *entire* country is one company, there are no other "Government entities" or "private sector". Just - as we both said - multiple "sections" aka "business units". And when word from up top comes to make the sort of generic "downsizing" cuts we're seeing in the news, *every* "business unit" follows suit - they are all following the same board of directors.
> or they can sign on for benefits if nothing is available
Ie, dole.
Again - if run as a company, where is this dole coming from? (Modern) companies do not provide dole.
> Playground insults
Hmm. A playground insult is "you smell of cheese". Pointing out that you are not apparently able to follow your own analogy consistently is out of the league of the average playground. Please work on your analogies and metaphors.
> The analogy works.
Strongly disagree.
"In your analogy, if an *entire* country is one company, there are no other "Government entities" or "private sector". Just - as we both said - multiple "sections" aka "business units". And when word from up top comes to make the sort of generic "downsizing" cuts we're seeing in the news, *every* "business unit" follows suit - they are all following the same board of directors."
Fine, we'll call them Business Units. Glad we're in agreement. Either way, people can generally move freely from one to the other assuming the right skill/demand balance, and it is rarely the case that all business units downsize at the same time unless the whole company is going down the tubes. As we're talking about a major superpower here, that would be highly unlikely.
"Ie, dole.
Again - if run as a company, where is this dole coming from? (Modern) companies do not provide dole."
In a typical company, the equivalent of 'dole' would be 'on the bench'. Meaning: you get paid some money for a limited period of time while you or the company figure out where you can add the most value. Many companies do this when they don't need your particular talent right now, but they might in the future. In fact I'm working on recruiting several people "from the bench" right now; their department got axed, but their particular combination of skills is still valuable and difficult to source from outside. So for the time being, they're being paid to do nothing except look for a new job.
"A playground insult is "you smell of cheese"."
That's one insult, as is 'You really missed the point', 'you couldn't even figure that out' or 'Your analogy... is so weak even you can not see how it works!'. All are ill-considered, neh-neh responses unbecoming of a thinking adult. Do better.
"Strongly disagree."
You're allowed to. At least it shows you have a mind of your own.
"Now, now many real companies move their unwanted to another section?"
Assuming you meant 'how' many companies, the answer is many of them. Big companies typically run a construction where (1) you are informed your role is no longer required, (2) you have a fixed period (typically 30 days) to find yourself another role in another department, before (3) you are put on the exit pathway, a.k.a. made redundant.
I don't know if you've been through this process, but I have; many times. From both sides of the table.
They're scrapping the weather service as well. That one I'm told has something like a 73:1 return for each dollar spent, by diverse ways and means.
It isn't about savings, it isn't about fraud. It's about billionaires destroying any competition to the private sector so that if you want anything at all, you have to pay them.
This one is the most scary as it's going lead to a drastic increase in weather related fatalities. At a time when that is already on the rise due to climate change... Which is something else this administration is actively trying to sweep under the rug. Likely because people knowing we're screwing up the planet is detrimental to the fossil fuel industry's stock prices.
I don't think you understand just how much of what is done is done by people who qualify as federal workers. The US postal service, for example, has 600,000 employees who are all federal workers. That may sound like a lot until you consider that the USPS handles over 300 million items of mail every single day and every one of them has to go through at least three pairs of hands - collection, sorting and delivery.
Yes, the federal government is the largest employer in America with around 2.7 million employees. But they're working for 330 million people. You wouldn't try to run a 100-seat restaurant with one table server, would you?
US sides with Russia, North Korea and Belarus to vote against an UN resolution condemning Russian invasion of Ukraine.
If for some there was any doubt the US joined the Axis of Evil, wake up.
The US is now an unfriendly country run by a mafia-style gangster, whose only goal is to make as much money as possible, by coercition and blackmail if necessary. What is left of the Free World needs to unite to face this new threat.
US sides with Russia, North Korea and Belarus to vote against an UN resolution condemning Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Which was a bit of political theatre, especially as UN resolutions usually don't actually achieve anything. US is working towards peace in Ukraine, the EU seems determined still to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.
The US is now an unfriendly country run by a mafia-style gangster, whose only goal is to make as much money as possible, by coercition and blackmail if necessary.
I think you've got the wrong country and might (or should) be thinking of Ukraine. Currently run by a President who's term expired nearly a year ago. Who talks about peace negotiations, but passed a law so he couldn't actually meet and negotiate with The Putin. And also when Trump started talking about $300bn given to Ukraine, said that he's missing $100bn. And who's now offering to resign in exchange for NATO membership. And who doesn't seem to realise that he's going to be resigned anyway.
But then Zelensky is also apparently being pressured to sign a deal that gives the US full control over Ukraine's oil, gas and mineral reserves, along with full control over Odessa's port. All revenues apparently go to the US first, and then Ukraine might get some share of that. And if Ukraine objects, it could argue it's case in NYC courts.. Which is pretty much a complete surrender of Ukraine's economic sovereignty, and something where even though I despise the WLB, it's a horrible deal for Ukraine. But I predicted this would happen, ie like Greece's asset stripping during their economic crisis, only this deal seems far worse. But the likely deal Ukraine would get from the EU probably isn't going to be much better.
This post has been deleted by its author
Fuck me, there is some shite in this post. Did you know that the UK did not hold elections (apart from the bit at the end with Japan) during the second world war? Because holding elections whilst there is a war on is a FUCKING STUPID idea.
There is NO negotiation with Putin. He reneges on every agreement. Why do people not get this? If Putin wins anything, he WILL NOT STOP.
Because holding elections whilst there is a war on is a FUCKING STUPID idea.
Sure, but keep martial law, keep being president. Plus the WLB also pointed out that if he ended martial law, there would probably be mass desertion.
There is NO negotiation with Putin. He reneges on every agreement. Why do people not get this? If Putin wins anything, he WILL NOT STOP.
He can't be bargained with, he can't be reasoned with, he doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and he absolutely will not stop... ever, until you are dead! Or perhaps not. After all there was Minsk, but that was a ploy to re-arm and train Ukraine so they could conduct their re-occupation of the Rhineland. I mean Donbas and Crimea. Which is one of those boring little details overlooked with the "unprovoked, full-scale invasion" meme. So Ukraine had been massing it's forces in readiness to attack the DPR & LPR. Russia kept saying "Don't do it!", our media focused on Russia's build up in readiness to counter, then Zelensky FAFO'd. Merkel said Minsk was just an excuse to buy time, Russia already knew that.
And then there was Istanbul, where Ukraine had a fairly decent peace deal they'd pretty much agreed to. Then BoJo went to Kiev, and death followed. Ukraine is now around 25% smaller, with millions dead, maimed or displaced. The US doesn't want to play any more, and the EU and UK seem determined to fight to the last Ukrainian. Then of course there's the cognitive dissonance. If Ukraine doesn't build a wall of dead soldiers, The Putin will be in Paris by xmas. Then Russia is so incompetent that their 'two week' campaign is now into the 4th year. It doesn't really follow. If Russia is doing so badly, why, then is it an existential threat to Brussels?
But history has long shown that if neighbours trade and share economic benefits, they're less likely to start wars.. But that's also one of the reasons for this proxy war. A combined EU-Russia economic bloc would be a far greater threat to the US. Pre-2022, the EU had a larger economy than the US, now, it doesn't and is in the process of collapsing and imploding.
Yes, but Putin doesn't want a neighbour. He wants a slave.
Is Ukraine being in Nato sensible? I think not (personally). I think a series of different pacts is what is needed to guarantee their security.
But can Putin be made to stop? Yes he can. Given that with very little real inconvenience, the EU and US economies have absorbed supporting Ukraine. Imagine if they actually mobilised?
Whatever you say, Putin has no excuse for invading. Were there things to be annoyed about? Yes. But aggression on this scale? Absolutely not.
Have the Ukrainians treated the Russian speakers badly? Yes. So apply economic pressure to have referenda - for example (before 2014)
And as for retaking the territory, totally understandable. Its Ukraine, not Russia. And it wasn't Ukraine that prevented them having control over their own country and needing to 're-take it'.
So lets stop making excuses for Putin.
However he's painted himself into a corner now. And that IS a problem. So something has to happen because 'unconditional surrender' of Russia isn't realistic. I'm sure Zelensky knows that. But lets help Ukraine get a 'reasonable' peace deal. Otherwise we've rewarded Putin's aggression and China will be in Taiwan in 2028.
However he's painted himself into a corner now. And that IS a problem. So something has to happen because 'unconditional surrender' of Russia isn't realistic. I'm sure Zelensky knows that. But lets help Ukraine get a 'reasonable' peace deal. Otherwise we've rewarded Putin's aggression and China will be in Taiwan in 2028.
I disagree. It's the EU (and UK) that have painted themselves into a corner. Whatever it takes, for as long as it takes, so fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian. The Schlock and Awe sanctions didn't work at the outset, and now we're up to the 16th round, the EU still hasn't taken the hint that they're harming our economies more than Russia. Trump doesn't have the obligations towards Ukraine that the Biden family had, and rightly wants to end the conflict and the billions being poured into one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
You're correct that unconditional surrender, regime change and pulling a Yugoslavia on the Russian Federation isn't realistic, because it should be clear to anyone with a functioning brain that Russia is winning, and Ukraine is losing badly. The WLB tried to justify their invasion of Russia as getting something for Ukraine's 'exchange fund'. But their Kursk venture has gone much the same way as it did for their spiritual heroes during WW2, and they're down to holding around 400km^2 now, and at a horrific cost.
And the WLB still can't do any serious peace negotiations because it's illegal for him to negotiate with Putin. If he was serious about peace, he could signal that by having that law repealed. The West doesn't really hold a strong hand when it comes to a settlement, and the best Ukraine could do is try to seek some favorable terms.. But thus far, it's demands have been a joke. Meanwhile, Russia continues to attrit UAF forces, and it'll be interesting to see if Russia continues to advance, and maybe take Odessa, or claim other oblasts.
> fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian
You get a lot of mileage from that straight-up parroting of Russian propaganda- i.e. the feigned pretence that you/Russia care about dead Ukrainians fighting to defend *their* country while ignoring the deaths of countless invading Russian soldiers- don't you?
You get a lot of mileage from that straight-up parroting of Russian propaganda- i.e. the feigned pretence that you/Russia care about dead Ukrainians fighting to defend *their* country while ignoring the deaths of countless invading Russian soldiers- don't you?
I'm not sure why you think it's a 'feigned pretence', or 'parroting Russian propaganda'. It's just something any self-respecting human should be concerned about. It's also mostly a Ukrainian problem. Since their coup and civil war started, Ukraine has lost millions of people to migration, and from the civil war itself. When that started and the UAF started shelling and bombing the civilian population in the DPR & LPR, around 1.5m people from the Donbas left for Russia. Then since the SMO started and places like Mariupol were captured and rebuilt, some have been returning. Some have also been returning to fight for the DPR & LPR forces.
One of the big lies around this fiasco is ignoring the reality, ie it started as a civil war and a reaction to the Kiev regime and their policies, and that civil war is continuing. Two sets of Ukrainians, both fighting for what they believe is their homeland. Kiev doubled down on dumb and imposed their virulent anti-Russian policies, like abolishing the Russian Orthodox church and creating their own state religion, plus reducing autonomy for regions, which was one of the things that triggered Crimea's secession, along with the Donbas. The meme goes that this was all Russia, and ignores that a large number of Ukraine's armed forces defected to the DPR & LPR.
So I care more about Ukrainians, because they're the ones that are mostly suffering as a result of our proxy war.. Which our 'leaders' seem determined to continue. Along with perhaps some bad news from Trump yesterday that his 'deal' will supply more money & weapons so the conflict can continue. So much for peace, and Russia's going to have heard Trump's response and are probably going to continue the SMO until our leaders finally see sense and stop the conflict. It was also interesting to see a statement from Russia yesterday announcing that the EU (and UK) would not be part of peace negotiations because Russia (obviously) regard them as hostile.
This post has been deleted by its author
You really cant help yourself with your Ukraine hate.
russia cant invade west europe but the can destroy much of it. Because thats what russia is good at. Destroying everything. DPR&LPR was invaded by russian forces long before 2022 but dont let that stop your hate and shit posting.
the WLB also pointed out that if he ended martial law, there would probably be mass desertion.
If before every engagement in WW2 the US army troops were told "you can desert if you want with no consequences, now let's fix bayonets and charge those machine guns", or "you can desert if you want with no consequences, now please take this Sherman with the gun that won't penetrate the Tiger up against that column of Tiger tanks" then what do you suppose the outcome of the war would have been?
It's exactly why Russia has a recruitment crisis for the Russian Armed Farces at the moment; Russians know that joining their army means that like 70% of them will be dead within a month in exchange for a foot square chunk of Ukraine and the gory of the motherland. Not really worth dying for unless your already 80 and likely to drop dead in a few months and want the recruitment and killed in action bonuses for your family, hence that's about the only people in Russia signing up.
A combined EU-Russia economic bloc would be a far greater threat to the US.
Alas comrade, Russia has zero chance of conquering the EU to add our wealth to yours. If you were thinking more along the lines of some form of peaceful trading status such as you had before stating that you intended to invade Europe in the first few days of the Ukraine invasion then firstly you've fucked any possibility of that, and secondly Russia has a GDP a third smaller than the UK, which is a rather less objectionable partner for France and Germany.
If before every engagement in WW2 the US army troops were told "you can desert if you want with no consequences, now let's fix bayonets and charge those machine guns", or "you can desert if you want with no consequences,
Way to miss the point. Soldiers are under contract. Martial law has allowed the UAF to ignore some, or all of that contract. Soldier must hold their position at all costs and can't leave the front line, except in a body bag or ambulance. Due to Ukraine's manpower crisis, soldiers aren't being rotated away from the front lines for R&R, so morale is low and capability reduced. Especially when places they've been ordered to hold at all costs then become 'We didn't want that anyway', and strategicaly important locations become unimportant after they're lost.
But lift martial law and soldiers who's contracts have expired can leave, and penalties for desertion are much less severe.
Alas comrade, Russia has zero chance of conquering the EU to add our wealth to yours. If you were thinking more along the lines of some form of peaceful trading status such as you had before stating that you intended to invade Europe in the first few days of the Ukraine invasion then firstly you've fucked any possibility of that, and secondly Russia has a GDP a third smaller than the UK, which is a rather less objectionable partner for France and Germany.
Really? I missed the stated goals of the SMO were the conquest of the EU. Russia was pretty clear on those, and they pretty much mirrored the justification we used for the invasion and destruction of Yugoslavia. You're also demonstrating the cognitive dissonance. Why, if there's "zero chance of conquering the EU" are our 'leaders' so terrified of Russia and regard The Putin as an existential threat?
But the EU used to have a lot of trade with Russia that was mutually beneficial. Then along came sanctions, and Germany, Poland, the Baltic states etc suddenly lost that trading partner. This has cost billions and thousands of jobs, along with giving Russia some nice new factories that had to be abandoned by their Western owners because of those sanctions. Russians used to buy German cars, now they can't and buy Chinese or Russian cars instead. So Germany's car factories are closing due to lower demand and rising costs. The proxy war has cost the EU billions, all to prop up one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
As for Russia's GDP, that, along with Russia's defence spending just highlights one of the other oddities around this conflict. 28 or so countries with a combined GDP and defence spending that dwarves Russia can't seem to produce enough of the kit Ukraine says it needs to win, or even halt Russia. And the proxy war has resulted in EU country's GDP shrinking and some (most) going into recession, whilst Russia's GDP has been rising.. And it hasn't even switched to a full wartime economy. Sanctions have just benefitted Russia because as is always the case, if they can't import stuff, then they have to produce it themselves.. Or seek new trading partners. Like BRICS.
Then there's the sudden fuss around 'Rare Earth', which in a strict sense, Ukraine doesn't have, ie lanthanides. It has, or had substantial deposits of other minerals, but a lot of those deposits are now part of the Russian Federation. Plus The Putin, being The Putin pointed out that if the US wants minerals, Russia has a carpton of those and perhaps the US would like to trade? Which would benefit the US, and if it gets MFN over the EU, would be advantageous, especially given the self-imposed trade barriers the EU has erected that have massively increased costs to EU industries. And if Russia and the US enjoy billions in mutually beneficial trade, then there's less incentive to upset your trading partner by invading countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia etc etc.
So improved global security, because the Great Powers are all friends now, and less need to spend money on defence against threats that don't really exist. Except the EU doesn't seem to grasp that making friends is better than making enemies, and again seems determined to keep fighting this proxy war to the last Ukrainian. Next cunning plan is to print 700bn to keep the conflict going. And Macron showed what an idiot he was when meeting with Trump, and explaining that as part of the EU's 'Peace Plan', Russia would somehow be willing to give the EU the 300bn they've currently frozen/stolen.
Either way, Ukraine is screwed and has lost any chance of independence, especially when their WLB is currently in the process of selling out the country. Along with stunts like this-
https://english.nv.ua/nation/elections-in-ukraine-rada-upholds-resolution-on-democracy-and-declares-zelenskyy-s-legitimacy-50492891.html
“The Verkhovna Rada declares that, as a democratic nation, Ukraine will announce presidential elections by parliamentary decision once comprehensive, just, and sustainable peace is secured, ensuring they meet all international electoral standards.”
Zelensky making himself President for life. Keep the conflict going and refuse to negotiate any sane peace deal, and he remains in charge. Or finds out that life can be quite short and Ukraine has another coup to remove their clown-in-chief.
honestly, do you get paid for this? or you do it for free?
Of course I do, and I'm just about to order a third yacht to house my expanding harem*.
So here's a thing. The US and Russia held bilateral talks in Saudi recently. A bunch of other countries jumped up and down and said they wanted to attend, thus demonstrating they don't quite understand the concept of bilateral. Since then, there's been a conveyor belt of 'leaders' jumping up and down demanding that they be allowed to attend any future peace negotiations. Strange thing about peace treaties are those are usually held between parties to the conflict, with maybe a 3rd nation hosting or mediating, much as Turkey did during the Instanbul Agreement almost signed during the first weeks of the SMO.
But then BoJo went to Kiev, and told Ukraine to fight, and die.
So Russia isn't exactly very trusting of the West given what happened with Minsk and Istanbul. If the EU and UK want to officially declare themselves as parties to the conflict and beligerents, then maybe they can get seats at the table. Starmer can bore Russia and Ukraine into submission. Sign now or I'll keep talking. Or Ukraine can be represented by Kaia Kallas, who previously represented around 0.2% of the EU economy, just got snubbed during her US visit and is virulently anti-Russian. The EU, UK and now US seem determined to have Ukraine fight on, and don't seem serious about peace. The peace 'plan' seems to assume a cease fire, but why would Russia agree to that when all the previous cease fires have been broken?
So the conflict will probably continue until Ukraine gets serious about peace, or is forced to seek terms. Ukraine could signal their intent by repealing the law that prevents their WLB from speaking with Putin, but it hasn't, it's just declared the WLB President until he decides there's a peace deal on the table.. Or the WLB is removed from office in another coup, which is a situation he probably wouldn't survive.
*Do I really have to add the tag?
And that happened-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cdel2npwe50o
Watch in full: Angry exchange between Trump and Zelensky at White House
Not exactly good news for Ukraine, peace and especially not the WLB who is almost certainly going to have to be replaced by someone who's more diplomatic and a better negotiator. Which is a bit of a problem, given in theory, that would require an election.
Not exactly good news for Ukraine
In general, being screamed at by two thin-skinned angry toddlers doesn't reflect badly on the screamee but the screamers. How childish were they? "You didn't thank us" and "you have to apologise" are not things said by mature, intelligent politicians.
Overentitled, thin-skinned angry man-children? Yes.
@CrazyOldCatMan
"In general, being screamed at by two thin-skinned angry toddlers doesn't reflect badly on the screamee but the screamers. How childish were they? "You didn't thank us" and "you have to apologise" are not things said by mature, intelligent politicians."
Try watching the whole discussion. I expect your opinion will switch 180 degrees very quickly
Except that, as Macron says, everything Europe is giving is aid, not a loan.
And the EU will provide aid until Ukraine decides to stop. Its not the EU fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian.
Trump isn't interested in ensuring this ends with Russia understanding that it can't do this again. Now nobody, EU or US has given enough to Ukraine to ensure this happens. And this, I believe, is the mistake. However Trump's "End this Now" makes no sense. He's not offering anything.
Strategically, Trump should see that ensuring Russia realises that starting this war was a bad plan is the outcome he should be after. Because that disuades Russia from attacking the Baltics and does provide a degree of hope for Taiwan.
His current capitulation to Putin will result in more instability, not less.
I'm struggling to see how he thinks this helps the US's strategic cause.
And on the basis of the current US policy, the US should have been completely happy for Japan to invade the whole of South East Asia in WW2. Because it only did so because the west was preventing it from getting the natural resources it felt it was entitled to. It didn't want to fight the US. It just wanted Oil and minerals from the Dutch East Indies.
From Trump's commercial perspective, beating Japan makes no sense. Just tell them off for bombing Hawaii and tell them to leave Australia alone. But after that, why bother fighting them? Absolutely no point.
The fact that the US has as much power as it does today, is based on the fact it was prepared to exercise it and hold others to account (however imperfectly) 80 years ago.
Soon the US will not be a trustworthy partner any more and (for example) the EU will not buy US military kit etc. Because who knows when Trump will embargo stuff. He's just too much of a loose cannon. Right now people aren't saying too much. But over time, the untrustworthiness will translate into unpicking dependencies on the US, which will reduce the US influence and power. Then people will just tell him (or his successors of similar mind-set) where to get off.
This is why the US population should be concerned. This erosion will be felt for a long time. China will be laughing.
Because if Russia taking over and extinguishing Ukraine as a sovereign nation is normalized
No outcome leaves Ukraine as a sovereign nation. If it joins the EU, it surrenders sovereignty to Brussels. If it signs Trump's minerals deal, it surrenders sovereignty to the US. If it, or some of it remains indpendent, it goes bankrupt, or the EU will carry on their influence campaign to get it to join the EU. Or it loses everything east of the Dnipr to Russia, along with probably Odessa and becomes a failed state. Which is a process that began in 1991, complete with fun soverign stunts like selling China their first aircraft carrier.
I think you need to look up and then understand the definition of a sovereign nation. All the constituent nations of the EU are sovereign. Ukraine won't sign away sovereignty by signing agreements for US miners to dig for rare earths. There are many scenarios in which Ukraine remains sovereign, and none of the others are in any way optimal.
I think you need to look up and then understand the definition of a sovereign nation.
Not me guv, but that response makes me pretty sure how you voted for Brexit..
All the constituent nations of the EU are sovereign. Ukraine won't sign away sovereignty by signing agreements for US miners to dig for rare earths.
No, they are not. A generally accepted test of sovereignty is if a nation is independent or self-sufficient with their economic, miltary and diplomatic abilities. So simple tests like the ability to independently enter into treaties, trade agreements, defend themselves or exert power. Thanks to an ever increasing set of exclusive EU (in) Competencies, EU state can't really do any of the above. And despite Remnants claiming an EU military was a crazy idea, the EU is, of course now calling for a Pan-European Defence Organisation to duplicate or replace NATO.
So the UK is now free to sign trade deals, or treaties. If Ukraine was already in the EU, it probably wouldn't be able to sign a trade deal with the US because trade policy is a job for Brussels.. But some of that depends on just how bad a deal Ukraine is offered. It's also one of the problems Ukraine has internally because their Banderites want Ukraine to remain sovereign and independent, not subservient to Brussels.
> Which was a bit of political theatre
Ah, yes. "I can't come close to justifying that, so I'll pretend they didn't mean it and that it doesn't matter".
> the EU seems determined still to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian
Ah, yes. The straight-from-the-Russian-propaganda-playbook feigned concern for dying Ukrainians while ignoring deaths of Russians in the meat grinder.
> Currently run by a President who's term expired nearly a year ago.
Ah, yes. The straight-from-the-Russian-propaganda-playbook attack on Zelenskyy for not holding a new election under conditions of war and partial occupation that make it effectively impossible to hold a legitimate election.
"The monitors at HUD are now showcasing the wins of the Trump administration," a spokesperson told The Register, "including action to lower the cost and expand the supply of affordable housing. We expect the media to cover these historic achievements with the same level of detail and immediacy as other frivolous stories."
I love it. Either this guy is a complete moron, or an evil genius.
1. I went to the office
2. I watched video being played throughout building of Trump kissing King Elon’s feet
3. After management learned all the IT staff was fired by Elon, I was tasked with removing videos of Trump kissing king Elon’s feet
4. I went through the office to unplug 72 TVs playing videos of Trump kissing King Elon’s feet
5. We had a review meeting to discuss how videos of Trump kissing king Elon’s feet ended up on dozens of TVs throughout building and the consequences of Elon firing all the IT people.
I hate how the Register is now sinking low into politics. This is a tech blog, not a place to add to post endless childish comments about politicians.
We get it. You don't like Trump. But save that for more appropriate forums. Let's talk about technology, otherwise it turns into a cesspit.
Totally! GenAI hardly qualifies as tech and shouldn't be regulated anyways, contrary to what some sleepy joes may suggest. After all, it's just harmless boys-will-be-boys fun, harassment, bioweapons, cybercrime, misinformation, copyright infringement, illegal acts and all ... automated, at industrial scales ... great for pranks!
The Reg (unlike X/twitter) should be sternly censored for its wanton frivolity in this. And the monitors should be re-plugged to rightly celebrate this most #winning of our educational programs on how to make great deals in Housing! </sarc>
"This is a tech blog, not a place to add to post endless childish comments about politicians."
El Reg is just a blog now?
Why don't you set an example and stop your own political commentary? Your own 29 post posting history consists of roughly 20% political comments with plenty of childish comments:
"...Guardian politics that have created this and countless other problems we face today in society"
a spokesperson told The Register, "including action to lower the cost and expand the supply of affordable housing. We expect the media to cover these historic achievements with the same level of detail and immediacy as other frivolous stories."
Unlikely. Trump must not be seen to do anything good, its always bad and if it is good the story must be twisted. As for the reg focusing on success I refer to a previous comment-
https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2024/12/07/elon_election_spending/#c_4979441
" deepfake video of President Trump kissing and sucking Elon Musk's toes."
Could have been worse if that was me asking the AI, believe me !
"HUD staff reportedly resorted to unplugging the screens after failing to get the video removed from sight ..."
That's because the IT sec guys have already been let go. Remember this waste thing ? IT sec is usually the first ... before things hit the fan hard ...
<<Taking Trump & Musk out of this post>>
Most of us have worked for companies & organizations which have gone through re-orgs & changes. This is often a difficult decision for managers to make when they get told something like "Pick 10% to cut, and you can take one of those slots if you want". Yeah, a real S-sandwich, but that is why management gets paid the big bucks, right?
The quickest way to land on that manager's short list is to waste time doing something stupid in a very public way. Putting videos on a bunch of computers would qualify, and provide plenty of proof that the employee has excess time on their hands.
Sure, they will go down in a blaze of glory, and will be the secret heroes for many. But they will still be going down.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
