LGR4GM Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 (edited) They are grifters out to make a buck. This is straight up imperialism. This is why they want Greenland and why they want Canada. You better believe if economic war fails, real war is next. That's the only way to quench their naked greed. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-officials-us-owning-half-ukraine-rare-earth-minerals-rcna192325 "The Trump administration has suggested to Ukraine that the United States be granted 50% ownership of the country’s rare earth minerals, and signaled an openness to deploying American troops there to guard them if there’s a deal with Russia to end the war, according to four U.S. officials." Edited February 16 by LGR4GM Spelling
Hank Posted February 16 Author Report Posted February 16 5 hours ago, LGR4GM said: They are grifters out to make a buck. This is straight up imperialism. This is why they want Greenland and why they want Canada. You better believe if economic war fails, real war is next. That's the only way to quench their naked greed. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-officials-us-owning-half-ukraine-rare-earth-minerals-rcna192325 "The Trump administration has suggested to Ukraine that the United States be granted 50% ownership of the country’s rare earth minerals, and signaled an openness to deploying American troops there to guard them if there’s a deal with Russia to end the war, according to four U.S. officials." I don't see the problem with the quote you shared, though I have not read the article so maybe I'm missing something. This seems pretty standard under any administration, with varying percentages maybe.
JujuFish Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 3 hours ago, Hank said: I don't see the problem with the quote you shared, though I have not read the article so maybe I'm missing something. This seems pretty standard under any administration, with varying percentages maybe. You don't see a problem with strong-arming resources from Ukraine when they're being invaded by Russia? Did you forget that Trump was impeached withholding military aid from Ukraine to try getting Zelenskyy to dig up dirt on Biden and take the blame for Russian election interference? The US is a big reason Ukraine's even in this position right now.
K-9 Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 4 hours ago, Hank said: I don't see the problem with the quote you shared, though I have not read the article so maybe I'm missing something. This seems pretty standard under any administration, with varying percentages maybe. When was the last time an administration did anything even remotely similar?
Hank Posted February 16 Author Report Posted February 16 1 hour ago, JujuFish said: You don't see a problem with strong-arming resources from Ukraine when they're being invaded by Russia? Did you forget that Trump was impeached withholding military aid from Ukraine to try getting Zelenskyy to dig up dirt on Biden and take the blame for Russian election interference? The US is a big reason Ukraine's even in this position right now. My point is putting troops in Ukraine would be a deterrent to future invasions, much like having troops on the DMZ is a deterrent for North Korea invading South Korea. In return Trump may ask for payment/access in rare minerals that our country needs. It is not an uncommon practice. To answer your question, I don't know. A knee jerk reaction based on feels tells me no, we should spend trillions of dollars and take troops away from thier loved ones and put them in a combat zone for six months to a year on a rotational basis for the foreseeable future to bail out a corrupt regime from being devoured by a bigger corrupt regime out of the goodness of of hearts without asking anything in return. Or, maybe not. My scope of knowledge on global politics is to limited to have an educated opinion on the matter.
Hank Posted February 17 Author Report Posted February 17 16 minutes ago, K-9 said: When was the last time an administration did anything even remotely similar? When we kept saddam hussein from invading Kuwait for a deal on oil.
Brawndo Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-administration-wants-un-fire-nuclear-safety-workers-cant-figure-rcna192345 Shades of Kevyn Adams firing the IT guy and having to re-hire him the next day. 1 1
K-9 Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 12 minutes ago, Hank said: When we kept saddam hussein from invading Kuwait for a deal on oil. I’ll have to do more research, but that doesn’t sound right. In all the books and articles I’ve read over the years as well as all the contemporaneous news of the day, I never saw any mention of the US having made an oil deal with Hussein to keep him from invading Kuwait. I’m sure Charles Krauthammer and George Will, who I read religiously back in the day, would have written columns about it, too. And Hussein did invade Kuwait. The only deals I can recall between the US and Iraq relate to our giving them arms and military expertise as we backed them in their war with Iran during the Reagan administration.
LGR4GM Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 5 minutes ago, Brawndo said: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-administration-wants-un-fire-nuclear-safety-workers-cant-figure-rcna192345 Shades of Kevyn Adams firing the IT guy and having to re-hire him the next day. Trump and Musk are special level of stupid... and arrogant.
LGR4GM Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 This program was cut because trump and Musk are to stupid to understand that words only have meaning in context: This isn't just wrong, it's evil.
Hank Posted February 17 Author Report Posted February 17 36 minutes ago, K-9 said: I’ll have to do more research, but that doesn’t sound right. In all the books and articles I’ve read over the years as well as all the contemporaneous news of the day, I never saw any mention of the US having made an oil deal with Hussein to keep him from invading Kuwait. I’m sure Charles Krauthammer and George Will, who I read religiously back in the day, would have written columns about it, too. And Hussein did invade Kuwait. The only deals I can recall between the US and Iraq relate to our giving them arms and military expertise as we backed them in their war with Iran during the Reagan administration. Yes, Iraq did invade Kuwait when Kuwait refused to forgive loans Iraq incurred from the iraq-iran war and we came to Kuwaits aid and drove iraq out. I guess I could have been more clear. We kept bases operational in Kuwait, giving a a stronger foothold in the region for when we invaded iraq a couple years later. Some believe we invaded iraq because they had WMDs that we never found. Some believe the invasion was about oil. I was referencing deals made with Kuwait (and to a lesser extent the UAE) prior to our invasion of Iraq.
Brawndo Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 38 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: This program was cut because trump and Musk are to stupid to understand that words only have meaning in context: This isn't just wrong, it's evil. Great My 19yo has severe autism and is currently in a similar program through Summit. 1
SABRES 0311 Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 1 hour ago, Hank said: My point is putting troops in Ukraine would be a deterrent to future invasions, much like having troops on the DMZ is a deterrent for North Korea invading South Korea. In return Trump may ask for payment/access in rare minerals that our country needs. It is not an uncommon practice. To answer your question, I don't know. A knee jerk reaction based on feels tells me no, we should spend trillions of dollars and take troops away from thier loved ones and put them in a combat zone for six months to a year on a rotational basis for the foreseeable future to bail out a corrupt regime from being devoured by a bigger corrupt regime out of the goodness of of hearts without asking anything in return. Or, maybe not. My scope of knowledge on global politics is to limited to have an educated opinion on the matter. To date I think Russia has been using its “B Squad” of forces. IMO their intent is to wear down not only Ukrainian resolve but that of NATO. The other option would be full scale assault which would more than likely result in multinational ground and air forces getting involved. The correct term for what Russia is doing is Low Intensity Conflict. Like Biden authorizing ATACMs, U.S. forces in Ukraine would be an escalation.
Hank Posted February 17 Author Report Posted February 17 4 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: To date I think Russia has been using its “B Squad” of forces. IMO their intent is to wear down not only Ukrainian resolve but that of NATO. The other option would be full scale assault which would more than likely result in multinational ground and air forces getting involved. The correct term for what Russia is doing is Low Intensity Conflict. Like Biden authorizing ATACMs, U.S. forces in Ukraine would be an escalation. True. How bad does our government want them minerals?
SABRES 0311 Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 2 minutes ago, Hank said: True. How bad does our government want them minerals? Bad I would assume. Similarly we sell lots of weapons to Mid East countries to counter Iran. We also have U.S. forces in Kuwait and Bahrain. Like you said we have forces in South Korea too. The difference is though, Iran and NK are not Russia.
K-9 Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 24 minutes ago, Hank said: Yes, Iraq did invade Kuwait when Kuwait refused to forgive loans Iraq incurred from the iraq-iran war and we came to Kuwaits aid and drove iraq out. I guess I could have been more clear. We kept bases operational in Kuwait, giving a a stronger foothold in the region for when we invaded iraq a couple years later. Some believe we invaded iraq because they had WMDs that we never found. Some believe the invasion was about oil. I was referencing deals made with Kuwait (and to a lesser extent the UAE) prior to our invasion of Iraq. Right, our deal was with Kuwait, not Hussein. Glad we cleared that up. But that is nothing like what Trump is attempting to do with Zelensky and Ukraine. We never, EVER asked for a percentage of Kuwait oil production in exchange for our military personnel to go there and guard it and besides, it was the Brits who first got into what would later become an independent Kuwait and developed the oil industry there over 100 years ago. Other than what Kuwait exports to the US under long time current trade agreements, there was never a deal for their oil as a quid pro quo for anything else. Kuwait agreed to let us stay there post Desert Storm as part of the Defense Cooperation Agreement of 1991 after the coalition liberated Kuwait. Again, totally unlike what Trump is suggesting in Ukraine.
LGR4GM Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Brawndo said: Great My 19yo has severe autism and is currently in a similar program through Summit. Love summit, they're great. I don't have child there but they're great. Edited February 17 by LGR4GM
LGR4GM Posted Monday at 03:46 PM Report Posted Monday at 03:46 PM Quote The Justice Department moved to dismiss corruption charges against Adams on Friday, following an internal mutiny that included a wave of resignations over the department’s handling of Adams’ case. At least seven DOJ officials have resigned as part of the fallout of Adams’ legal saga, including Danielle R. Sassoon, who was the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan. Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered U.S. prosecutors in New York to dismiss the charges against Adams, arguing in part that the case was interfering with Adams’ ability to help the administration tackle illegal immigration. Sassoon, a conservative who clerked for the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, resigned in a sharply worded memo to Attorney General Pam Bondi, which said that during a Jan. 31 meeting with Bove and Adams’ lawyers, “Adams’s attorneys repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with Department’s enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed.” https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-border-czar-tom-homan-calls-eric-adams-quid-quo-allegation-ridic-rcna192403 If you comply with Trump, just like any good mob boss, he will shield you from consequences as long as it suits his purposes.
Hank Posted Monday at 06:57 PM Author Report Posted Monday at 06:57 PM As an aside, I think calling them aliens is dumb.
SABRES 0311 Posted Tuesday at 12:10 AM Report Posted Tuesday at 12:10 AM 3 hours ago, Hank said: A member of the squad doing something stupid? How dare anyone question her. They must be racist. 😂 1
LGR4GM Posted Tuesday at 04:15 PM Report Posted Tuesday at 04:15 PM https://www.thecanadianpressnews.ca/health/republicans-consider-cuts-and-work-requirements-for-medicaid-jeopardizing-care-for-millions/article_0dc1747b-e316-53e2-8bc3-d48f17c6c06d.html Quote To whittle down the budget, the GOP-controlled Congress is eyeing work requirements for Medicaid. It's also considering paying a shrunken, fixed rate to states. All told, over the next decade, Republican lawmakers could try to siphon billions of dollars from the nearly-free health care coverage offered to the poorest Americans. Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana has floated the idea of tying work to Medicaid. “It’s common sense,” Johnson said. “Little things like that make a big difference not only in the budgeting process but in the morale of the people. You know, work is good for you. You find dignity in work.” But about 92% of Medicaid enrollees are already working, attending school or caregiving, according to an analysis by KFF, a health policy research firm. Republicans have suggested a work requirement similar to the conditions for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly called food stamps. Those ages 16 to 59 must work or volunteer at least 80 hours a month if they are not in school, caring for a child under age 6, disabled, pregnant or homeless. On average, a SNAP enrollee's monthly household income is $852, and the enrollee typically receives $239 in benefits. Hope you don't have medicaid and I hope you don't use the ACA portals to get healthcare because Republicans plan to destroy both to help fund their tax cuts for billionaires program.
Hank Posted Tuesday at 06:07 PM Author Report Posted Tuesday at 06:07 PM 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: https://www.thecanadianpressnews.ca/health/republicans-consider-cuts-and-work-requirements-for-medicaid-jeopardizing-care-for-millions/article_0dc1747b-e316-53e2-8bc3-d48f17c6c06d.html Hope you don't have medicaid and I hope you don't use the ACA portals to get healthcare because Republicans plan to destroy both to help fund their tax cuts for billionaires program. It's interesting that thecanadianpressnews would have such an informed view.
LGR4GM Posted Tuesday at 07:13 PM Report Posted Tuesday at 07:13 PM 1 hour ago, Hank said: It's interesting that thecanadianpressnews would have such an informed view. Here are other sources if you prefer: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5150953-house-democrats-medicaid-cuts/ https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2025/02/18/republicans-eye-cuts-work-requirements-for-medicaid-jeopardizing-care-for-millions/ https://apnews.com/article/medicaid-cuts-work-requirements-congress-republicans-90ec1119f1d95de067c76f79eec7fa87 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/feb/18/democratic-super-pac-sets-sights-gop-medicaid-cut-/ https://www.salon.com/2025/02/16/economists-say-the-budget-would-destroy-medicaid-and-disproportionately-benefit-the-1/ Tried to pull a variety.
Recommended Posts