Have a love/hate view of Bertrand. Speaks to Vance’s thoughts on Ukraine. No mention of Russia from either as far as I know. China bad consistent with previous messaging. Imagine at Dem convention it will be Russia bad Ukraine good and China neutral.
The bottom line is that we can pontificate until the cows come home but there is no telling how Trump, Vance or any of his team will act until we see them back in corridors of power. If I were American, I'd still vote for him because of his raw courage and persistence in the face of evil, and because the alternative is the complete destruction of the nation. However, God alone knows what he will do when he is safely ensconced in the Oval Office.
**US presidential candidate Donald Trump will be ready to enter into dialogue with Russian leader Vladimir Putin to resolve the conflict in Ukraine without any mediators.**
This was reported to a TASS correspondent by **a high-ranking Republican Party functionary** taking part in the party’s national convention in Milwaukee, where Trump’s official nomination as a presidential candidate was recently announced. “Undoubtedly, he will begin a dialogue with Putin. And he will do this without intermediaries,” the agency’s interlocutor emphasized, answering a question about Trump’s readiness to enter into a dialogue with Putin on Ukraine. “Now the democrats are not conducting any negotiations [with Russia]. Of course, there must be someone who will start negotiations so that you [Russia and Ukraine] can come to some kind of agreement,” the agency’s interlocutor emphasized and answered the question affirmatively, whether that person will be Trump.
**The functionary expressed confidence that the North Atlantic Alliance should not be present in Ukraine, the conflict should be resolved through negotiations. “NATO does not need to be in Ukraine. We need dialogue, and if it starts, we can all come to an agreement on how to overcome it [the conflict in Ukraine],” the agency’s interlocutor noted.**
I’m imagining Trump negotiating across the table with Putin staring at Trump’s mangled ear and developing a camaraderie to align against similar enemies.
Putin and Lavrov , who along with Maria Z is at the UN today have both stated the election is Americas internal issue. I doubt Putin will discuss anything with Trump until after 20 Jan 2025.
I have no problem with what you're saying. I will add, however, re China--among other possible countries--why do American politicians think it's OK to go around calling other powerful countries "threats"? In what world is that helpful to a peaceful well ordered int'l society? It's not being said for the benefit of the American public--Americans may want to restore American greatness, but they're not interested in wars anymore. We've had enough of that. So who are these words meant to impress?
Agreed. And then they (the Neocons of both parties but mainly the Republicans) also use China as an excuse for the Ukraine proxy war (we have to "impress" China with our resolve and strength or else they will go all imperialistic).
So much of the anti-China rhetoric seems to be contingent on the Taiwan issue (or it is at least presented as such). That despite the "One China" policy to which we supposedly adhere. Part of the problem is the ambiguity of that policy and part of the problem is the Neocons itching for war with China. This essay presents a good overview of the history of the policy:
"Washington acknowledged the Chinese position that Taiwan was part of China. For geopolitical reasons, both the United States and the PRC were willing to go forward with diplomatic recognition despite their differences on this matter. When China attempted to change the Chinese text from the original acknowledge to recognize, Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate hearing questioner, “[W]e regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word ‘acknowledge’ as being the word that is determinative for the U.S.”
So the future of the U.S. and much of the world hinges on the wording of a diplomatic agreement from 45 years ago that was never completely agreed upon but was put into effect anyway in the interest of peaceful relations and to leverage power against the Soviet Union, which no longer exists. Now it is being used as a pretext for war. Go figure.
Have a love/hate view of Bertrand. Speaks to Vance’s thoughts on Ukraine. No mention of Russia from either as far as I know. China bad consistent with previous messaging. Imagine at Dem convention it will be Russia bad Ukraine good and China neutral.
The bottom line is that we can pontificate until the cows come home but there is no telling how Trump, Vance or any of his team will act until we see them back in corridors of power. If I were American, I'd still vote for him because of his raw courage and persistence in the face of evil, and because the alternative is the complete destruction of the nation. However, God alone knows what he will do when he is safely ensconced in the Oval Office.
MILWAUKEE /Wisconsin/, July 16. /TASS/.
**US presidential candidate Donald Trump will be ready to enter into dialogue with Russian leader Vladimir Putin to resolve the conflict in Ukraine without any mediators.**
This was reported to a TASS correspondent by **a high-ranking Republican Party functionary** taking part in the party’s national convention in Milwaukee, where Trump’s official nomination as a presidential candidate was recently announced. “Undoubtedly, he will begin a dialogue with Putin. And he will do this without intermediaries,” the agency’s interlocutor emphasized, answering a question about Trump’s readiness to enter into a dialogue with Putin on Ukraine. “Now the democrats are not conducting any negotiations [with Russia]. Of course, there must be someone who will start negotiations so that you [Russia and Ukraine] can come to some kind of agreement,” the agency’s interlocutor emphasized and answered the question affirmatively, whether that person will be Trump.
**The functionary expressed confidence that the North Atlantic Alliance should not be present in Ukraine, the conflict should be resolved through negotiations. “NATO does not need to be in Ukraine. We need dialogue, and if it starts, we can all come to an agreement on how to overcome it [the conflict in Ukraine],” the agency’s interlocutor noted.**
I’m imagining Trump negotiating across the table with Putin staring at Trump’s mangled ear and developing a camaraderie to align against similar enemies.
Putin and Lavrov , who along with Maria Z is at the UN today have both stated the election is Americas internal issue. I doubt Putin will discuss anything with Trump until after 20 Jan 2025.
1. I don't believe *Putin* is in NY. I only saw Lavrov and Maria arriving.
2. I'm sure TASS is referring to a POTUS Trump. They do use the future tense.
3. There is probably significance to Trump's repeated meetings with Orban. Orban may not be an intermediary, but he is able to explain Russian views.
You are entirely correct
It is only Lavrov and Maria.
My sentence structure was extremely poor!!
I should have made two sentences.
Putin and Lavrov have said the election is America's internal affair
Lavrov and Maria are in NY.
Agree with your other thoughts!
Great list Cass.
I have no problem with what you're saying. I will add, however, re China--among other possible countries--why do American politicians think it's OK to go around calling other powerful countries "threats"? In what world is that helpful to a peaceful well ordered int'l society? It's not being said for the benefit of the American public--Americans may want to restore American greatness, but they're not interested in wars anymore. We've had enough of that. So who are these words meant to impress?
Agreed. And then they (the Neocons of both parties but mainly the Republicans) also use China as an excuse for the Ukraine proxy war (we have to "impress" China with our resolve and strength or else they will go all imperialistic).
So much of the anti-China rhetoric seems to be contingent on the Taiwan issue (or it is at least presented as such). That despite the "One China" policy to which we supposedly adhere. Part of the problem is the ambiguity of that policy and part of the problem is the Neocons itching for war with China. This essay presents a good overview of the history of the policy:
https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-us-one-china-policy-and-why-does-it-matter
"Washington acknowledged the Chinese position that Taiwan was part of China. For geopolitical reasons, both the United States and the PRC were willing to go forward with diplomatic recognition despite their differences on this matter. When China attempted to change the Chinese text from the original acknowledge to recognize, Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate hearing questioner, “[W]e regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word ‘acknowledge’ as being the word that is determinative for the U.S.”
So the future of the U.S. and much of the world hinges on the wording of a diplomatic agreement from 45 years ago that was never completely agreed upon but was put into effect anyway in the interest of peaceful relations and to leverage power against the Soviet Union, which no longer exists. Now it is being used as a pretext for war. Go figure.