since youre so good with history, you would know a verbal agreement was made with russia not to expand nato 1 inch east of hte german border in the 1990s
THE TRUMP 2024 THREAD
- Thread starter Wally
- Start date
Over70irregs
Well-Known Member
Is it ok to push recession as long as Trump does it for our good?
abcnews.go.com
Trump 2nd term live updates: Trump declines to rule out recession as he defends tariffs
President Donald Trump spoke with reporters on Air Force One, where he defended tariffs, saying they will be the "greatest thing we've ever done as a country."
the federal govt can always hire people when the free market can not.Is it ok to push recession as long as Trump does it for our good?
Trump 2nd term live updates: Trump declines to rule out recession as he defends tariffs
President Donald Trump spoke with reporters on Air Force One, where he defended tariffs, saying they will be the "greatest thing we've ever done as a country."
unemployment is a political choice.
"The controversy regarding the legitimacy of eastward NATO expansion relates to the aftermath of the Revolutions of 1989, when the fall of Soviet-allied communist states to opposition parties brought European spheres of influence into question.
Russian authorities claim that agreement on non-expansion of NATO to Eastern Europe took place orally[1] and the alliance violated it with its expansion,[1][2][3][4] while the leaders of the alliance claim that no such promise was made[5] and that such a decision could only be made in writing.[6][7] Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who participated in the 1990 negotiations, subsequently spoke out about the existence of a "guarantee of non-expansion of NATO to the east" inconsistently, confirming its existence in some interviews[8][9] and denying it in others.[10][11] Among academic researchers, opinions on the existence or absence of a non-extension agreement also differ.[12][13]"
Over70irregs
Well-Known Member
Yes. The rate cuts are forcefully coming
Making stocks affordable again...
El Correcto
god is dead
Yeah just like the native Americans got what they deserved with 3 beads for manhattan or whatever.Interesting you assume Trump’s view of himself and say he “packed” the court? Replacing Supreme Court justices that have retired or died is not packing the court. And they’ve ruled against him just as many times as they ruled in his favor..
Ukraine already got what very little was promised. There is no more obligation on our part.
Ukraine Symposium – The Budapest Memorandum’s History and Role in the Conflict - Lieber Institute West Point
December 2024 marked the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum by which Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal.lieber.westpoint.edu
“The Budapest Memorandum is not a treaty and did not reflect any new international legal obligations for any of the signatory States. Rather, the Memorandum was meticulously drafted to avoid giving any impression of legal obligation.
For example, both during the three-year negotiation period and in the drafting of the Memorandum, U.S. State Department officials insisted on using the term “assurances” instead of “guarantees” to describe the security commitments. Although Ukraine initially framed its request as seeking security “guarantees,” the United States wished to avoid this term as it “implied a deeper, even legally-binding commitment.”
“Furthermore, the Memorandum does not use the terms “agree” or “agreement.” Rather, it refers to all commitments as “reaffirmations,” which suggests not new pledges but rather reiteration of prior commitments. These features of the Memorandum and the context of the negotiation more broadly demonstrate that the signatory States—at least the United States and Russia—had no intention “to be bound as a matter of international law, such that non-compliance would amount to an ‘internationally wrongful act’” under the international law of State responsibility. Even the Trilateral Statement”
“Finally, the operative paragraphs of the Budapest Memorandum refer almost exclusively to Ukraine only as an object of the commitments, but never as having obligations. (The one exception is paragraph 6, which states that the signatory States, including Ukraine, “will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments”). This further undermines any effort to characterize the Memorandum in legal terms or to refer to it as an agreement (legal or otherwise).”
“The Memorandum is also important because it reminds us of the important distinction between political commitments and legal obligations. When negotiations began, Ukraine “sought legally binding guarantees from the [United States] that it would intervene should Ukraine’s sovereignty be breached.” Although it was forced to settle for less, Ukraine nonetheless has sought to frame the Memorandum in international legal terms, including perhaps by registeringit with the Secretariat of the United Nations in 2014 for inclusion within the UN Treaty Series (although the Treaty Series includes not only treaties but also “international agreements”).”
This is blatantly screwing Ukraine who should have kept the nukes and not trusted the west.
Then they act like Zelensky should being thanking the orange re tard for bending him over a barrel for mineral rights.
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
Yep, they definitely should’ve kept the nukes. What a bunch of idiots. Maybe the Ukrainian leaders aren’t smart enough to have their own country? Giving away that kind of leverage for almost nothing certainly was a dumb move.
oldngray
nowhere special
The Indians that sold Manhattan were just passing through and didn't even own it. The original version of selling the Brooklyn bridge.
Next Day Err
Well-Known Member
Capitulation is the goal for this White House. WEAK
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
Annihilation was the goal of the former White House. STUPID
Next Day Err
Well-Known Member
Also the Tesla bulls are awfully quiet lately. Down 45% off its highs LOL
El Correcto
god is dead
It wasn’t in exchange for almost nothing.
They would have made an enemy of the United States.
United States promoted the idea they could be relied on and should be in control of defense against Russia, for generations.
They are now running away from that promise. For people who so love the west the orange re tards are going whole hog on destroying it. Scapegoating allies and international agreements as a reason for their failures domestically.
Next Day Err
Well-Known Member
LOL you support weakness. That’s all.
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
Again, if someone asked me to give up something as important as a weapon that makes me a world player, and I believe it then that’s their problem. They’re about as dumb as the Indians were. Nobody ran from any promise there was never a promise to fund war until they got what they wanted.
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
Lol, you support death and a war that can’t be won.
This is not a shock as you’ve never been right about anything.
El Correcto
god is dead
I don’t get why Christians piss their pants by having to face down Russian aggression or the idea of people dying.
We all get to go to heaven anyways right? Jesus is there for you fren, be brave.
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
We’re trying to keep the world safe for heathens like you because hopefully you’ll have a chance to repent L O L.
And as usual here we go when you lose an argument and look like an idiot you start spouting Jesus hate
Aren’t you the same knucklehead who called Democrats a bunch of pedo cult worshipers?
You change your parties as much as you change your underwear.
El Correcto
god is dead
This war could easily be won.
Russia is being handled with kids gloves with the current weapons being provided to Ukraine.
They are even threatening nukes because they know of the west got serious with them they would never win a ground war even against their neighbor.
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
Take your ass over there and fight, then quit spouting off. You know you wouldn’t you know you’re too much of a chicken.. you might break a nail.
