“Talks”. More like “What would You like me to do now Mister Putin, Sir?”
any ‘deal’ that doesn’t include ukraine in the negotiations is no deal at all. it’s a sham to give russia whatever tf they want.
I hope they tell him to go fuck himself if he wants to collect the 500 billion for this “deal”
Just charge him the exact amount he demands as rent and utilities bills for his military bases all over Europe.
But be careful, that guy is known not to pay his bills, so be prepared to seize assets in case he doesn’t pay up.
It’s so fricking american to talk over the fate of one country without giving said country a say in the matters.
And then loudly applaud it at home, with most voters ignorant of what just happened, even with protestors outside the room.
also the applause aren’t for peace; they’re for not spending money
war is a synonym for expense to the right
to be fair - most of these voters wouldn’t even be able to spot Ukraine on a world map even if the name was printed on it in plain english…
Why is Ukraine not involved in these calls ?
He’s doing the same thing he did with Afghanistan.
Also Palestinians who were not part of his supposed Mid-East peace deal.
Trump talked to Palestinian president Abbas last time he was in office.
My comment was regarding these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Accords
Do you think the Abraham Accords are undesirable?
The PA is a great example of Counter Insurgency
The plight of the Palestinians was an afterthought, if even that. Along with the US, “the Abraham Accords gave Israel the impression they could proceed without anything significant with the Palestinians,” Hellyer said.
And that was a problem, because instead of trying to strike some sort of deal with the Palestinians, the Israelis realized they could push for whatever they wanted with America’s full support. In effect, the Abraham Accords emboldened the Israelis while allowing them to disregard Palestinian demands or rights.
The Abraham Accords emboldened Israel’s Settler-Colonial Occupation
A fair criticism. However, the situation between Israel and Palestine has been stuck for two decades now.
The Palestinians haven’t even been able to form a unified government for about that time as well.
Dictators, doing dictator things, because they’re dictators.
Apparently Zelensky and Putin aren’t getting along right now.
Because that doesn’t fit into the plans…
Trump is Putin’s
bumboysensual but submissive lover and will pretend to “negotiate” only to hand Ukraine a list of demands written by Putler. And Ukraine doesn’t acquiesce, Trump will do everything he can do block US aid to Ukraine.bumboy
Homophobic slurs are not appreciated here
Would “Trump’s bitch” be better?
Perhaps if I’d written “Putin and Trump are in a loving dom-sub relationship where Trump loves getting directions from his dom on what to do with the US”?
Not all insults are -phobic. I could call you a dog and make it every offensive despite me utterly loving dogs.
Not all insults are -phobic
But this one is. It’s per definition a derogatory term for a gay man, like the f-word. Or like the n-word for blacks. So cut it.
All right. Seems I’m out of the times with that one.
Duly noted.
There are plenty of ways to word this in a non-phobic, non-sexual way, e.g.: the term “agent”. So you must be adding the sexual wording for another reason and I guess that reason is humor. Except, what is the humorous bit here? Is it possibly the gay bit?
Would you object to “treasonous cunt”? (Keep in mind my English sensibilities are that of the UK more than US.)
I mean I wouldn’t be surprised if you do.
However “agent” doesn’t convey the meaning I wanted. It lacks the emphasis of Putin being the one who asserts the terms.
I’m sorry for enjoying outdated flowery language.
The humorous bit isn’t being gay. It’s “Trump is a piece of pudding and Putin is an actual ruthless KGB trained wily politician who learned during the Soviets and will manipulate Trump easily”.
I apologise for any offense. None was meant. Well, not towards sexual minorities. I meant to imply submissiveness, not homophobia. The problem here is also that some of these terms are okay to use within certain communities but you can’t know whether I frequent or identify with any of them. (Some I do identify with, although not too deeply, but let’s not get into my sexuality/gender it’s no excuse for the language I use.)
Anyway, 100% my bad, youre right, in sentiment at least if not entirely rhetorically.
I’m genuinely asking out of good faith here ; “agent” seems too clinical and without any negative connotation I wish to attach. I understand my choice of insult was in poor taste, so might I as for alternatives? (If you choose not to high-road me for why we should insult Trump and Putin, that is.)
Gay rights and trans rights are human rights and if anyone wants to take them away I’m gonna identify as a problem. But… I’m also sometimes liberal with language. I’m open-minded to improving mine, but also use mine with confidence and sometimes it results in poor choices. Mea culpa.
Thanks for the long explanation! And it’s alright. :) I’m not trying to police language too much–you’ll note that I don’t usually remove four-letter words, unless applied to a fellow commenter. Even in cases where the insult can be used in a gendered way, like “cunt.”
The one you used just hinted at homophobia and I was wondering if there’s bigotry behind it. It appears there’s not, so that’s good.
I’m not trying to police language too much
You didn’t. Fair criticism.
It appears there’s not, so that’s good.
I sure like to think so but we’re all biased.
I find it quite unsettling that you’re getting downvoted.
Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact flashbacks anyone?
