Mr. Trump, PLEASE talk to the Russians – – –

They learned they don’t like communism the hard way – – – and they have nukes – – – a LOT of nukes – – –

Still M.A.D. After All These Years?

17 thoughts on “Mr. Trump, PLEASE talk to the Russians – – –”

  1. What would be the point? For some reason a lot of people are thinking that Trump will tell the Russians they can have the Crimea and the US will back off it’s support of the Ukraine’s efforts to move closer to Nato. And perhaps allow Russia to be a part of a solution in Syria that would deprive the US the long sought control over Syria and bringing it into the US sphere of influence.

    Why is that? About all he’s suggested doing so far is trading the Crimea to Russia in return for Russia reducing it’s nuclear arsenal. If any Americans think there’s any hope in that kind of a deal with Russia then they’re suffering from arrogance. Russia considers the Crimea as part of Russia and it’s obviously not going to trade it for anything!

    Trump makes no sense in the least because he has no understanding of foreign affairs. When he spoke out in that way he demonstrated his naivety and so he’s remained quiet since.

    This is why this ‘story’ deserves a comment. An appeal to Trump to speak to Russia is totally unrealistic. Trump “is” the problem, not part of a solution to the problem. If the nuclear clock has been advanced since the end of Obama’s term then it’s due to Trump and his admin.

    Those who hold out hope in Trump keep expecting that he will at least reiterate on the words he used during his campaign on improving relations with Russia. They need to understand that it’s not coming. Trump played his hand when he tried to trade the Crimea for Russian nuclear weapons. And that’s just as good as it’s ever going to get.

    Briliant foreign policy move! Just fu-king brilliant!

    1. Trading Crimea isn’t a stupid idea. Russia wants a return to normalised trade. Russia wants recognition of Crimea. Currently Russia has neither.

      Trump needs to appear to have won something from Russia so war-mongering Republicans will praise him for his victory. Americans have been told Crimea was stolen. Trump needs to negotiate domestic policy, not only foreign affairs. So, he can’t lose votes over Russia.

      Hillary would have been far worse. Trump barely won. Be happy if Trump does recognise Crimea as Russian.

      You seem to expect Trump to explain to American voters the history of Crimea. This is a democracy. Voters can’t be explained anything. Voters want to see a victory. So, it does make sense that Trump wants to trade Crimea for something.

      As for what I’d do in Trump’s place, I’d recongise Crimea as Russian. But I’m not Trump. Trump won. And if he’s better than Hillary, then people should be appreciative. Where constructive criticism is possible, it should also be given. Key word: “constructive”.

    2. “Russia considers the Crimea as part of Russia…”

      That seems a good thing seeing as how Crimea considers Crimea part of Russia as well.

  2. My post here notwithsanding the small effort that Mr. white has made on promotion of a good cause. That’s appreciated by anyone of good intentions of course, even thought it’s next to no contribution at all.
    And fwiw, telling us that they learned about communism the hard way is just another display of American arrogance.

    1. Is your posting here a greater contribution than Mr. White’s?

      Communism was a failure. This is a largely libertarian website. I dislike both ideologies. It’s not arrogance to believe communism to have been a failure. And considering how poorly the Communists treated Russians early on, I don’t see why you’d like the system.

      The solution, when asked which ideological camp you’re in, is to say neither camp. Ideologies are overly simplistic and religious-like.

      America today is certainly not libertarian…

      1. I don’t consider Mr. White’s contribution as being anything worthwhile other than to get the conversation going. Americans criticizing Russia on communism’s failure is not in the interest of good relations with Russia. Nor would be Russians criticizing America for it’s dismal failure of capitalism to look after the interests of the people.
        Other than that, I don’t hear that you have understood anything in what I said.

        1. It’s positive to remind Americans that Russia is no longer Communist. The “Right” in the US likes to say Russia is Communist; The “Left” likes to say Russia is fascist.

          In truth, Russia is neither. But these labels frighten Americans.

        1. Wonderful site, to be sure. I try to post constructively, haha.

          I appreciate how for years I’ve always known what’s going on simply by periodically checking this site. The magic formula works, though I wish the market better rewarded your hard work.

        2. And I will just add, this site being an antiwar site is different than this ‘site’s agenda being antiwar’.

  3. The point is indeed to remind the old right — where I came from a half-century ago — that the old scary Russian meme is out dated, and to remind everyone else that talking to folks is a really good idea, especially when, as Luchorpan pointed out Putin and the Russians are looking for trade – – – and have nukes.

    It’s fairly clear that the war-party profiteers are about the only folks to profit from hostilities. Chris Hedges does a pretty good job of nailing The BIG picture – – –

    Chris Hedges: The Real Purpose of the U.S. Government’s Report on Alleged Hacking by Russia

    And Seymour Hersh nails the too obvious media promotion of the highly questionable reports — and might I say hypocritical — claim by the “Intelligence” Community of the Russian election hack. HERE: Seymour Hersh Blasts Media for Uncritically Promoting Russian Hacking Story

    1. “It’s fairly clear that the war-party profiteers are about the only folks to profit from hostilities.”

      Wrong! But do the American people want to continue to play their game? Is it worth it?

      The US is on the verge of winning the whole bag of marbles. Think along the lines of the consequences if it doesn’t.

      Is it worth it?

    2. Chris Hedges piece: Yes, the establishment is guilty as charged. But you miss my point and you have an excuse for doing that because you may not be reading here at this site.

      I’m simply saying that Trump wasn’t capable of understanding the implications of peaceful relations with Russia and consequently said something that got in all this hot water. And further to that, Trump said it carelessly because he had a hunch it would capture the hearts and minds of the antiwar faction.

      And now he desperately wants out of it.

      That’s it!

      Trump will be a willing president who will follow the US gameplan that was established when the Soviet Union fell and the opportunity arose for the US to take complete control over the ME. And then later, other countries will come much easily due to US power no longer being challenged. If not then US power is very starkly challenged in the future.

      If you have confidence in Trump then that is what you must base your argument upon. If you don’t then it’s pretty simple to understand and agree with my position. It’s the only possible default.

      And I admit, it’s easier for me, a Canadian, to buy into the whole schtick. But you must eventually do that because Trump has nothing to offer.

      1. “It’s fairly clear that the war-party profiteers are about the only folks to profit from hostilities.”

        Don: >>” Wrong!”<<

        Who then?

        1. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I told you and I’ve repeated it dozens of times on this site. Twice of which I’ve repeated on this very thread.

          And you’re managed to ignore everything I’ve said on Trump, which was said with sincerity.

          And meantime as we speak, we find that Trump has again opened his stupid ignorant cakehole with his accusation of Obama wired Trump tower! The fu–er is completely unhinged!

          1. Ah Don it’s fairly clear that the problem is with you. You apparently have a delusions of clear communication problem, else you would have no problem clarifying who else besides the war-party and it’s militaryindustrialcomplex profiteers you suggest gain from hostilities — and possible nuclear confrontation — with the Russians.

            You get another chance.

            And apparently you mistake me for a Trump fan? – – –

            And let me remind you, this is an ANTI-WAR venue, NOT an anti-Trump forum. Except when the two directly coincide.

    3. I’ve now read Jeremy Scahill’s piece on the Hersch interview. The only positive bit that was mentioned by Hersch was a suggestion that Trump could be a “circuit breaker”. It was far outweighed by the negatives on Trump. l
      As you will have guessed by now, I have no criticism of Hersch’s ideas in that piece. But I do believe that Hersch should now begin to question Trump’s sincerity on Russia/US relations. He will look bad by the absence of such.

Comments are closed.