[The Hill]Trump and Putin Held Second Informal Meeting During G20

[tweaker2]

Again more bad decisions by trump.

"
That Trump was not joined in the conversation by his own translator is a breach of national security protocol, according to Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group, though one that the president likely would not know about."

This guy has not one lick of sense, common or not. I am embarrassed for my fellow Americans, and for the rest of the world for that matter.

But to hear it from many of Trump's supporters, we should all just shut up already about Trump and his love and respect for his Russian friends and give Trump the time and space he needs to MAGA no matter how long it takes. This because they voted for him, they won and we should respect their judgement of Trump's character and intentions. We should be grateful for any help that the Russians somehow "didn't" give them in their efforts to help Trump defeat that evil blasphemous gay loving pro-abortion anti-gun murderous female who had the gall to think that she deserved to be our leader.

We should all simply ignore the plethora of anti-American, treasonous, idiotic, criminal, selfish, un-presidential, foot shooting tweets and narcissistic thing that Trump has committed just like they do and everything will be just fine.

Just you wait and see.

 

[Jhhnn]

we should respect their judgement of Trump's character and intentions

Yeh, we should be down for being gaslighted by chumps.

 

[agent00f]

You mean this Viktor?
øhttps://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...ve-ex-president-yanukovich-1.3071639?mode=amp
That guy was essentally the Ukrainian Trump version and he went directly in opposition to what the people wanted : tighter relations with the EU. So Putin fcked them over. Again. Sort of missed cause Viktor was tossed sort of not cause Crimea and the east. But you are right, its the same play you see with Trump.

Putin didn't f them for the sake of f-ing them over. He and the russian state are content so long as they have reasonable control over their buffer zone to the west. That was no longer the case without someone friendly like Yanukovych, plus aggressive NATO expansion into ukraine. These are rational self-interested moves by rational self-interested actors.

So you think Russia wouldn't meddle anywhere as long as the US doesn't? If Russia and China had as much influence and strength as the US does, you can bet they wouldn't just let alone everything if they had the capability to mold the world as they see fit.

"The breakup of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century." -- Vlad

It's just a fact that Putin took Crimea and pushed westward into Ukraine after he couldn't control those areas crucial to the security of russia anymore, same as he pulled out all the stops to install a puppet in the white house to ward off further threats from hawkish centrist democrats angling for white welfare votes. Putin knows how the game works, and I think you can too if you weren't motivated not to.

 

[Jhhnn]

Putin didn't f them for the sake of f-ing them over. He and the russian state are content so long as they have reasonable control over their buffer zone to the west. That was no longer the case without someone friendly like Yanukovych, plus aggressive NATO expansion into ukraine. These are rational self-interested moves by rational self-interested actors.



It's just a fact that Putin took Crimea and pushed westward into Ukraine after he couldn't control those areas crucial to the security of russia anymore, same as he pulled out all the stops to install a puppet in the white house to ward off further threats from hawkish centrist democrats angling for white welfare votes. Putin knows how the game works, and I think you can too if you weren't motivated not to.

Representing Ukraine in total disarray as a threat to he Russian state is bogus. It's rather a display of rank opportunism by Putin.

 

[agent00f]

Representing Ukraine in total disarray as a threat to he Russian state is bogus. It's rather a display of rank opportunism by Putin.

Aggressive Nato expansion into Ukraine not a threat to russia, LOLOLOL

 

[HomerJS]

Aggressive Nato expansion into Ukraine not a threat to russia, LOLOLOL

Yeah eastern Europe is littered with all the leaders NATO assassinated. LOLOLOL

 

[Jhhnn]

Aggressive Nato expansion into Ukraine not a threat to russia, LOLOLOL

The chances of Ukraine being admitted into Nato in the immediate wake of Euromaidan were precisely zero, which is when Putin struck. Even today it would be like admitting Somalia.

 

[agent00f]

Yeah eastern Europe is littered with all the leaders NATO assassinated. LOLOLOL

The chances of Ukraine being admitted into Nato in the immediate wake of Euromaidan were precisely zero, which is when Putin struck. Even today it would be like admitting Somalia.

How's restarting the cold war been working out for clinton hawks?

The fundamental underlying dynamic to the politics clintonites tried to play is that they couldn't get enough white welfare votes from it to beat out the white nationalist interest in critical states.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Trump is just.... Dumb. Just did an interview with the New York Times. Said it was just pleasantries. Maybe 15 minutes if that. Then goes on to say they talked about adoptions. So that is about as far from pleasantries as you can get. That's policy. Specifically sanctions against Russia.

The amateur hour 4 years continues.

 

[cytg111]

Putin didn't f them for the sake of f-ing them over. He and the russian state are content so long as they have reasonable control over their buffer zone to the west. That was no longer the case without someone friendly like Yanukovych, plus aggressive NATO expansion into ukraine. These are rational self-interested moves by rational self-interested actors.



It's just a fact that Putin took Crimea and pushed westward into Ukraine after he couldn't control those areas crucial to the security of russia anymore, same as he pulled out all the stops to install a puppet in the white house to ward off further threats from hawkish centrist democrats angling for white welfare votes. Putin knows how the game works, and I think you can too if you weren't motivated not to.

"reasonable control over bufferzone to the west"?
I think we have two unknowns here, 1st who defines what is reasonable and 2nd what the fudder is a bufferzone? Is that something we get if we want it? Buffer countries? That is just insane IMO. And what happens if said buffer country grows a mind of its own? War it is. War because buffer country. What the actual.... Nuts. Insane. Retarded.
Shall we find conflicts where Putin has rolled in guns blazing without a NATO-too-close excuse? Putin is swinging his pecker around thats what it is.. RETURN OF THE GREAT USSR! - And he is getting older too and I am sure he has en endgame in mind before he checks out.

 

[Jhhnn]

How's restarting the cold war been working out for clinton hawks?

The fundamental underlying dynamic to the politics clintonites tried to play is that they couldn't get enough white welfare votes from it to beat out the white nationalist interest in critical states.

Doing a little Gish galloping back around to your contention that the US was the "real" aggressor in Ukraine, huh? Who started shooting, anyway?

Because the Obama Admin was pandering to white nationalists, right?

 

[J.Wilkins]

"reasonable control over bufferzone to the west"?
I think we have two unknowns here, 1st who defines what is reasonable and 2nd what the fudder is a bufferzone? Is that something we get if we want it? Buffer countries? That is just insane IMO. And what happens if said buffer country grows a mind of its own? War it is. War because buffer country. What the actual.... Nuts. Insane. Retarded.
Shall we find conflicts where Putin has rolled in guns blazing without a NATO-too-close excuse? Putin is swinging his pecker around thats what it is.. RETURN OF THE GREAT USSR! - And he is getting older too and I am sure he has en endgame in mind before he checks out.

The friends of fascism do love Russia's fascist means to subdue the populace of free nations by installing puppets under his control or, when that fails, invade.

It's no secret that Putin wants to bring forth a new Soviet regime that includes all the former nations but this time through installing puppet regimes rather than invasion (except when necessary).

 

[Thump553]

Trump is just.... Dumb. Just did an interview with the New York Times. Said it was just pleasantries. Maybe 15 minutes if that. Then goes on to say they talked about adoptions. So that is about as far from pleasantries as you can get. That's policy. Specifically sanctions against Russia.

The amateur hour 4 years continues.

This meeting was held in public view of the other G20 leaders and their spouses. The reports from those credible sources say the meeting lasted an hour.

 

[Clemenza]

Syrup or Jelly?

Russian dressing.

 

[agent00f]

"reasonable control over bufferzone to the west"?
I think we have two unknowns here, 1st who defines what is reasonable and 2nd what the fudder is a bufferzone? Is that something we get if we want it? Buffer countries? That is just insane IMO. And what happens if said buffer country grows a mind of its own? War it is. War because buffer country. What the actual.... Nuts. Insane. Retarded.
Shall we find conflicts where Putin has rolled in guns blazing without a NATO-too-close excuse? Putin is swinging his pecker around thats what it is.. RETURN OF THE GREAT USSR! - And he is getting older too and I am sure he has en endgame in mind before he checks out.

It's just a fact the Ukraine is russian's buffer to the west, same as north korea was for china. Try to recollect the war that was fought over the latter. In case that's still too confusing, imagine russian/chinese or their allies tanks rolling up to the US southern border; America wouldn't stand for it. In russia's case it's informed by a long history of invasions from their western front.

Of course clinton & allies aren't too stupid to know this, which is exactly why "acting tough" on defense to them meant backing russia into a corner. Well, it came back to bite them, as these things often do. Fortunately it was only Trump and not thermonuclear war.

Doing a little Gish galloping back around to your contention that the US was the "real" aggressor in Ukraine, huh? Who started shooting, anyway?

Because the Obama Admin was pandering to white nationalists, right?

In you case it's unclear whether it's playing dumb, or not.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's just a fact the Ukraine is russian's buffer to the west, same as north korea was for china. Try to recollect the war that was fought over the latter. In case that's still too confusing, imagine russian/chinese or their allies tanks rolling up to the US southern border; America wouldn't stand for it. In russia's case it's informed by a long history of invasions from their western front.

Of course clinton & allies aren't too stupid to know this, which is exactly why "acting tough" on defense to them meant backing russia into a corner. Well, it came back to bite them, as these things often do. Fortunately it was only Trump and not thermonuclear war.



In you case it's unclear whether it's playing dumb, or not.

More Gish galloping, I see.

Your basic contention is that Russia has the right to take back former territories of the USSR by force when they see fit & that they should suffer no consequences as a result. You then go on to assert that Russian interference in in our elections is justified because we won't go along with naked aggression by Russia.

Where do they invade next in order to restore their former glory?

 

[agent00f]

More Gish galloping, I see.

Your basic contention is that Russia has the right to take back former territories of the USSR by force when they see fit & that they should suffer no consequences as a result. You then go on to assert that Russian interference in in our elections is justified because we won't go along with naked aggression by Russia.

Where do they invade next in order to restore their former glory?

Look, I'm sure you're proud of yourself for memorizing that term just as you remember the D party line, but there's a difference in kind between memorization and applying words correctly.

My contention is that Russia will go to war if they lose control over their security buffer, same as the chinese went to war over korea and so on. The entire point of messing with them is to make Clinton look Reaganian to draw cold-warrior votes from the margins. Since you're not any good at simple observation either, the russians have been winning that war, too, thanks to easily played dummies like you.

 

[Jhhnn]

Look, I'm sure you're proud of yourself for memorizing that term just as you remember the D party line, but there's a difference in kind between memorization and applying words correctly.

My contention is that Russia will go to war if they lose control over their security buffer, same as the chinese went to war over korea and so on. The entire point of messing with them is to make Clinton look Reaganian to draw cold-warrior votes from the margins. Since you're not any good at simple observation either, the russians have been winning that war, too, thanks to easily played dummies like you.

More Gish galloping. Your original contention was that the Obama admin (your Clintonians) was pandering to white nationalists, an obvious absurdity. Now it's cold-warrior votes from the margins when, in truth, Trump will likely receive a bipartisan bill for tougher sanctions in the near future-

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/18/russia-sanctions-status-bob-corker-240675

I get that Russian considerations wrt Crimea are military. That doesn't extend to the Donbass where their efforts are economic warfare, hugely weakening the Ukrainian economy while stripping them of the industrial & mineral wealth of that region. It's straight up conquest.

 

[agent00f]

More Gish galloping. Your original contention was that the Obama admin (your Clintonians) was pandering to white nationalists, an obvious absurdity. Now it's cold-warrior votes from the margins when, in truth, Trump will likely receive a bipartisan bill for tougher sanctions in the near future-

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/18/russia-sanctions-status-bob-corker-240675

No, confusing white welfare beneficiaries with white nationalists is just your terrible reading comprehension. Similarly, you'll also have such a hard time understanding how D hawks emulate R hawks to get some of those defense votes.

I get that Russian considerations wrt Crimea are military. That doesn't extend to the Donbass where their efforts are economic warfare, hugely weakening the Ukrainian economy while stripping them of the industrial & mineral wealth of that region. It's straight up conquest.

Do you suppose the US will just let it go if the good people of Hawaii/Mexico or other region with substantial defense value and threat to the mainland decided to switch to the other side? Remember what's STILL happening with Cuba? The D hawks can coach it in all the "freedum" rhetoric they want, but there's a solid geopolitical reality that regional powers will not let enemy tanks roll up to their doorstep if they can do anything about it.

It's also simple reality that clintonites gambled with the livelihoods of ukrainians to get some votes, and they lost that bet to the detriment of a lot of people.

 

[cytg111]

It's just a fact the Ukraine is russian's buffer to the west, same as north korea was for china. Try to recollect the war that was fought over the latter. In case that's still too confusing, imagine russian/chinese or their allies tanks rolling up to the US southern border; America wouldn't stand for it. In russia's case it's informed by a long history of invasions from their western front.

Of course clinton & allies aren't too stupid to know this, which is exactly why "acting tough" on defense to them meant backing russia into a corner. Well, it came back to bite them, as these things often do. Fortunately it was only Trump and not thermonuclear war.



In you case it's unclear whether it's playing dumb, or not.

The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club. I reject your fact that Ukraine is deemed buffer country for thw PUSSR regime. I think Ukraine agrees with me, just a feeling. Who cares if tanks are rolling past your front yard if you got nukes in the back? Noone is gonna roll over your fence, NK case in point. Only reason you dont want some country to join a peace club is if you are war mongering yourself. He should really piss off. His spec ops are gaining unrivaled experience in inciting unrest and revolt spesnaz style... he is going to put these skills to use elsewhere as well. 70 years without war in europe. Hello Putin. Thanks but nothanks mkaybye?

 

[agent00f]

The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club. I reject your fact that Ukraine is deemed buffer country for thw PUSSR regime. I think Ukraine agrees with me, just a feeling. Who cares if tanks are rolling past your front yard if you got nukes in the back? Noone is gonna roll over your fence, NK case in point. Only reason you dont want some country to join a peace club is if you are war mongering yourself. He should really piss off. His spec ops are gaining unrivaled experience in inciting unrest and revolt spesnaz style... he is going to put these skills to use elsewhere as well. 70 years without war in europe. Hello Putin. Thanks but nothanks mkaybye?

Ukraine as buffer against invasion from the west is simply historical and geopolitical fact, which isn't going to change unless you've got access to a time machine. Just look at the D hawks talking about freedum there same as neocons talk about freedum in iraq.

70 years without war in europe was achieved by reasonably demarking & respecting bright lines in the sand between thermonuclear military powers, you know playing that game smart. Self-interested greedy hawks cross that line at their own peril, and evidently the peril of others they gamble with.

 

[zinfamous]

Look, I'm sure you're proud of yourself for memorizing that term just as you remember the D party line, but there's a difference in kind between memorization and applying words correctly.

My contention is that Russia will go to war if they lose control over their security buffer, same as the chinese went to war over korea and so on. The entire point of messing with them is to make Clinton look Reaganian to draw cold-warrior votes from the margins. Since you're not any good at simple observation either, the russians have been winning that war, too, thanks to easily played dummies like you.

I can't tell by this statement if it is an endorsement of the Russian perspective, or merely pointing out how they see the world because yes, I agree that this is what Russia believes, but it is inherently contradictory to the reality of the world. NATO and particularly these border countries are the security wall against Russian aggression. No one wants to invade Russia, no one really wants anything to do with Russia--certainly not the developed, modern West. Russia is a fucking shithole run by tyrants and a long successionary line of monied oligarchs. This is a society (plenty of wonderful people, mind you), that have gone through generation after generation of tyrannical Czars only to be followed by tyrannical, murderous, despots. There is really no modern, or even classical understanding of democratic principles in the written history of that country. It is a complete outlier when it comes to consideration of advanced economic and social policy.

There is no "messing with the Russians" outside of demanding that they respect the sovereign boarders of the nations that wish nothing to do with Russia and its despotism. How about Russia stop trying to invade neighbors and stop claiming that "expats are being discriminated against because sovereign countries won't respect the language of their former occupiers!"

Russia is only ever the aggressor in every single relation they have with the western world or otherwise. It has never been any other way.

 

[agent00f]

I can't tell by this statement if it is an endorsement of the Russian perspective, or merely pointing out how they see the world because yes, I agree that this is what Russia believes, but it is inherently contradictory to the reality of the world. NATO and particularly these border countries are the security wall against Russian aggression. No one wants to invade Russia, no one really wants anything to do with Russia--certainly not the developed, modern West. Russia is a fucking shithole run by tyrants and a long successionary line of monied oligarchs. This is a society (plenty of wonderful people, mind you), that have gone through generation after generation of tyrannical Czars only to be followed by tyrannical, murderous, despots. There is really no modern, or even classical understanding of democratic principles in the written history of that country. It is a complete outlier when it comes to consideration of advanced economic and social policy.

There is no "messing with the Russians" outside of demanding that they respect the sovereign boarders of the nations that wish nothing to do with Russia and its despotism. How about Russia stop trying to invade neighbors and stop claiming that "expats are being discriminated against because sovereign countries won't respect the language of their former occupiers!"

Russia is only ever the aggressor in every single relation they have with the western world or otherwise. It has never been any other way.

Great work denying the basic historical fact that Russia was invaded from the west multiple times, far more than the US which tried to maintain a buffer zone halfway round the world against them commies or I guess its the muslims now. But hey, we're the good guys so we get to do whatever we want.

 

[zinfamous]

Great work denying the basic historical fact that Russia was invaded from the west multiple times, far more than the US which tried to maintain a buffer zone halfway round the world against them commies or I guess its the muslims now. But hey, we're the good guys so we get to do whatever we want.

to be fair, napoleon tried to invade everyone, so I'll give you that. But this is going a long ways in explaining your lunacy on these forums--revisionist Russian sympathizer. I guess you'd prefer to see all the occupied, non-slavic territories returned to Russia just because they want them, yeah?

 

[agent00f]

to be fair, napoleon tried to invade everyone, so I'll give you that. But this is going a long ways in explaining your lunacy on these forums--revisionist Russian sympathizer. I guess you'd prefer to see all the occupied, non-slavic territories returned to Russia just because they want them, yeah?

So did the germans, and the swedes before all that, etc. I'm just pointing out the simple fact that Russia will act in their security self-interest to maintain that buffer zone, same as democratic hawks will act in their self-interest to protect the party line on "defense".