18 Comments
User's avatar
Doug Hoover's avatar

Russia is in a position to demand whatever it wants.

Thanks Neocons. They conned us all.

Expand full comment
Mike richards's avatar

Ditto Christian zionists, the religious wing of neocons?

Expand full comment
TomA's avatar

We can only hope that Russia perceives that the security threat it faces from Europe/NATO is one primarily of corrupted government leadership in the US/EU, and not due to citizen-based animosity or Russophobia. In other words, its true enemy is the Deep State/Neocons/WEF Globalists. If so, then Trump and Putin have common cause that can serve as the basis of a peaceful negotiation. And they both want the killing to stop so that the real fight with the Globalists can commence in earnest. And likely baby steps are in order to move in that direction. Putin can indicate cooperation by slowing his military advances and refraining from overreacting to Ukrainian provocations. Trump can accelerate the political overhaul of Europe by imposing a 10% tariff on their economies thereby forcing them into recession and ensuring the rise of alternative political parties. As such, Europe can only pull out of recession by reengaging with Russia to obtain cheap energy, but the price of that bailout will be a retreat of NATO hostility toward Russia. I think this is the deal that Trump is pursuing.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Tucker with Russ Vought

https://youtu.be/vydAb4RR1iI

Expand full comment
Jeff Cook-Coyle's avatar

Great interview!

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

The contrast between Trump's domestic and foreign policies is startling. The former is right on the money; the latter could have come from a crazy neocon think tank. He hasn't realised that the kind of slapping he's giving to the Wokerati won't work with the shrewd, hardheaded people in Beijing and Moscow.

Expand full comment
Chuck l's avatar

There’s bound to be collateral damage. But it has to happen this way. The legit spending will continue.

Expand full comment
Ray-SoCa's avatar

US Exports to China:

$147.81

https://www.statista.com/topics/2315/us-exports-to-china/#topicOverview

Mostly non manufactured items.

China Export to US:

$536.3 billion

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/imports/china

And this is not counting stuff that is sent through other countries to the US.

And I would be surprised, if all the stuff sent via Mail from Temu and such is counted. Under $800 and it just flows through the mail from China. This may be stopped by Trump's latest actions.

If Trump can somehow bring back manufacturing the US, it would be huge. Financially, it makes sense for US companies to outsource to show a higher rate of return on capital. For the US economically in the real economy, outsourcing manufacturing to other countries is bad for jobs and I question if it saves money with the additional cost of transportation. Not to mention the questionable quality issues of many Chinese goods, such as Food and Pharmaceuticals. It's terrifying the hold China has on so many medical and pharmaceutical items exported to the US.

China's exports of chemicals to Mexico and Canada for the production of Fentanyl, I see as Opium War 3.0. It's a brilliant strategy to weaken the US.

For rare earths and other industries, China will lower the market till the US supplier goes bankrupt, and will often buy them, and then raise prices. China has been very aggressive on targeting US industries to be replaced by Chinese based industries.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

1. Yes, our Ruling Class set the US up to be a supplier of raw materials, almost a third world type nation in relation to China. Our rulers did that to us, not China.

2. Bringing back manufacturing will take time. After all, it didn't just flow to China and other parts Asian. Ford and GM have moved to Mexico.

3. Re fentanyl, that's a big issue. Maybe it would be easier to resolve if the US wasn't continually threatening war on China. It was supposed to be this year, now they say two more years, right?

Expand full comment
Joe's avatar

Should have Changed that to

Right now US & NATO COMBINED could not win a war with Russia

As of May 2024, the Russian military had 1.32 million active-duty soldiers, 2 million reserve service members, and 250,000 paramilitary forces. --- But the Figures are not necessarily important

It's the training - the live experience - the daily experience - lived for 2 or more years of daily combat

Even if US and NATO put 200,000 soldiers into Ukraine today they would lose

they would be befuddled they have no training, they have no experience

And RUSSIA is Next Door

People don't seem to understand what every day grinding and losses have made the Russia army

And people don't seem to understand Logistics - Russia drives a tank across a border US has to fly it from OHIO to a Ship or Plane to Ukraine, then drive across the border

And people don't seem to understand Morale Soldier and Civilian Morale

You tell US soldiers interested in joining that in 3 - 6 months they will be fighting in Ukraine

Good Luck getting anyone to join

It is an impossible situation for US Ukraine All of NATO combined, the war is lost

by dragging it on, they only gave Russia more experience and willpower

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

Spot on. People over here have no idea what is going on east of the Dnieper. It's a titanic struggle right out of the Eastern Front in WW2. Huge forces arrayed, and huge losses. And the Russians are some of the meanest SoBs on the planet.

Expand full comment
Joe's avatar

agreed no US EU or any soldier willingly goes against the Russians

maybe at the beginning there was hope, but that Russia military has grown exponentially and is now far too well trained and experienced

Yes the US could win if the Russians were to attack the US

But Russians in Ukraine are playing a home game

Expand full comment
Joe's avatar

If you take the best professional tennis player in the world, and he takes 2 years off

and put him against the best division 1 college tennis player who for the past 2 years has been practicing every day and entering every tournament, grinding it out, guess who is going to win

And Russia is by no means a college tennis player

It's that simple

Expand full comment
Manul's avatar

Is Wikipedia funded by USAID?

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

It's almost certainly funded or at least supported by one of the usual "entities"

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Your homework assignment!

Expand full comment
Manul's avatar

Try this URL that exposes Wikimedia (parent of Wikipedia), EIN 200049703

https://datarepublican.com/officers/?nonprofit_kw=200049703

Click on "See USAID Grant Flow" (right side of page), and you will see that yes, through a rather circuitous route, Wikimedia receives dollars from organizations that receive taxpayer dollars, if I understand the graph correctly.

Clearly the graph shows the tangled up mess that are funding various organizations, and makes accountability difficult.

See on Twitter: https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1887191624750670294

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Good work--you get an A+!

Expand full comment