New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#3301 2026-10-21 19:31:25
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,993
Re: Politics
I probably should resist responding.
In the American civil war, the north needed weapons at any cost. So, they ran the printing press. They would buy almost anything. Even if I gun would not work the courts simply said it is a gun and that is OK.
Prior to the civil war America did not have the rich ruling class that it does now. The was generated by the process I am showing above.
A good part of having a war now and then is your weapons can be refined and if you make them good enough then you can sell the world wide. This is big business. The morality of it is extremely questionable. I would say we should not seek war, as they seem to come anyway.
But some don't want to wait to make that money. Blood money.
Do you see how this works it turns taxpayer money into money to funnel into special people pockets.
So, don't be so blind. And when your land is depopulated do you think they don't have plans for newcomers? Maybe like France or Italy?
Will you like that?
We are concerned for the welfare of Ukrainians and Russians. Great peoples who should not be wasted this way.
The Elites of Europe have had swollen heads for a long time. They are the spoiled part of the human race. Exceptionally good with language and cunning to cause harm to be deflected from them and focused at weak victems.
I think they are how evolution fails. First the human race becomes intelligent with just enough language to form a society. The a sub-species emerges that feeds on the productive citizens. Taking their wealth and mating potentials for themselves. It is very sad.
They however seized on the concept of "Survival of the fittest" and congratulated themselves for being evolved to exploit the people with true talents. And the twins of socialism the Communist and the NAZI served very well for their purposes. They and their children will not go to the worst dangers of a war, and in fact might have a fine adventure being promoted to high positions in the power structure, or even better have tax payer money tipped into their pockets.
Don't be so eager to be a victem.
Ending
Last edited by Void (2026-10-21 19:41:15)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3302 2026-10-21 22:42:43
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
Void,
This is the Mars Society. We are concerned with international affairs for a few reasons. For one: why do we want to go to Mars? If we do not understand relations of nations on this planet, then we will repeat all the same mistakes on the next. So we must address the problems currently happening to ensure we don't repeat those mistakes on Mars.
For another: the Mars Society is not just about a "flags and footprints" mission to Mars. And it's not about just science. Science is good, knowledge is good, but Mars and space in general is not just about science. We want to go to Mars to live there. Settling Mars is a big adventure. It will take a lot of resources. This will require resources of several countries. So conflicts here on Earth interfere with getting to Mars.
The United States used to have a policy of not supporting a standing army at all. In fact, West Point was built as a military academy to teach officers. The goal was to maintain a highly trained, highly skilled officer core who could recruit soldiers from the general public (civilians) then train them quickly to become an effective fighting force. The US would not maintain a large standing army. Several reasons for this.
it's too expensive
a standing army will look for something to do. If they don't have an enemy to fight, they could interfere with domestic affairs within the country.
when looking for something to do, the standing army may start a conflict with other countries
military contractors will pressure politicians to start a war, just so the army buys more weapons and ammunition
The US is now experiencing all of these problems. The solution: shrink the US military. No, the rest of the world does not need to increase its military. The US needs to unilaterally shrink its military. In times of peace, you're not supposed to have a military that large. The complication with this is there is a major war going on in Ukraine. Countries are required to increase their military in times of war. And if there's a chance the war you're not involved with spills over into your country, you still need to increase your military.
Ukraine is not "somebody else's war". It's wrong to say it's "not our war". In 1994, US President Bill Clinton signed the Budapest Memorandum, pressuring Ukraine to surrender their nuclear weapons in exchange for the US guarantee that if Russia should invade then the US would defend Ukraine. Now the US under Trump does not want to bother defending Ukraine. The US is required to defend Ukraine. If the US doesn't want that responsibility, then give Ukraine back their nuclear weapons. And I said "give". Ukraine did not sell them. Ukraine did not get any money for the weapons they surrendered. So give for free, the same number of nuclear weapons Ukraine had before the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. Each with the same yield as those Ukraine had. And mounted on ballistic missiles with the same range as Ukraine had. Not willing to do that? THEN GET OFF YOUR ASS!!!
Donald Trump doesn't seem to want to be held responsible for commitments made by previous presidents. Those commitments are part of the office of President of the United States. If Trump doesn't want those responsibilities, he can resign from the position of President.
I'm trying to make a couple points here. These points are NOT contradictory.
In times of peace, SHRINK YOUR DAMN MILITARY!
US is responsible for defending Ukraine
As you know, I live in Canada. Trump's behaviour has been a concern for Canada. The Manhattan Project was a joint venture of 3 equal partners: the US, UK, and Canada. Canada has had the knowledge to build nuclear weapons since the Manhattan Project. Canada built a nuclear research facility within Canada during the Manhattan Project. After WWII, Canada sold to Britain all the plutonium they needed to make their first nuclear weapon. The US pressured Canada to not build its own nuclear weapon, but to buy them from the US. So the US has some control. In the early 1960s, Canada purchased CIM-10 Bomarc Missiles from the US. They are anti-ballistic missiles, designed to defend against incoming Russian bombers or Russian ICBMs. Targeting with early 1960s technology was not good, so they had a small nuclear warhead. Intended to detonate in mid-air when they got close to their target. Canada gave them back after a few years. But Canada kept AIR-2 Genie missiles until 1972. Those are air-to-air missiles, intended to take out Russian bombers. Also with a small nuclear warhead. In 1972, the last ones Canada had were returned.
Canada and the US have integrated air defence over North America. That includes depending on the US to defend Canada from invasion by a country with nuclear weapons such as Russia. Can Canada depend on the US for that defence? Trump doesn't seem to want to protect other countries. He doesn't want the responsibility. If Canada can't count on the US, then Canada will have to build its own arsenal of nuclear weapons. That nuclear research facility built in Canada during the Manhattan Project was able to produce bomb grade plutonium. And was able to machine radioactive components into functional devices. That facility could be used to manufacture nuclear warheads. But some misguided civil servants wanted to ensure it could not be used for that purpose. A key piece of equipment in that facility had been replaced in 1958 with a new one. But that second one was shut down in 2007. Civil servants have tried to ensure the new replacement could not be used to make nuclear weapons. Civil servants today still have that obsession. Does Canada need to restore the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons? Again, Canada never built a single nuclear weapon, ever. However, until 2007, Canada has the ability to do so if needed. Does Canada need to restore that ability?
Offline
Like button can go here
#3303 2026-10-22 09:51:09
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,560
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
America is the only nation investing serious time and money in manned space exploration. No other nation has sent anyone to the moon, ever. Europeans and Asians have access to tech that NASA hadn't dreamt of in the 1960s because they were too damn busy inventing it as they needed it. They have vast monetary/economic/intellectual resources, but they're more interested in their antisocial programs than in doing anything that requires real commitment and screwing with things instead of other people. Socialists being antisocial is the only real commitment other nations have contributed.
Canada and the EU have the technology and data to build their own rockets and space capsules. Go build a rocket to launch someone to the moon. Prove that you and your fellow Canadians have the right stuff, or continue to run your mouth endlessly to people who live in a nation that has already demonstrated that it does. If any other nation stops flapping their gums long enough to demonstrate real technical achievement in space, you'll have our attention. Until then, stop telling us how you think we should run our program when we're the only nation developing fundamentally new space exploration technology.
If you think you can do it better, then do it!
In times of peace, SHRINK YOUR DAMN MILITARY!
SHRINKING YOUR MILITARY IN PEACETIME IS HOW YOU FIND YOURSELF UNPREPARED FOR THE NEXT WAR, SO NO, WE WON'T!
The only reason you have the ability to share your ignorance with the world is that the US military funded the creation of the very technology you like to use to sneer at us. Canada didn't create the internet; the Europeans didn't, the Russians didn't, and the Asians didn't do it, either. We Americans did that. More specifically, one of our military's "think tank" organizations saw the merit in sharing digital data at light speed, so they paid to invent it.
The Manhattan Project was a joint venture of 3 equal partners: the US, UK, and Canada.
Your attempt at revisionist history is quaint, but the Manhattan Project's contributions were never remotely equal. You are welcome to tell yourself whatever outrageous nonsense you think best supports your painful contortion of history, but when last I checked, the US paid to build the facilities to create highly enriched Uranium and Plutonium and to do the testing that created the first atomic weapons and atomic power.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3304 2026-10-22 09:51:46
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,993
Re: Politics
Are you suitable to be trusted? If not and I conclude not, you are not.
Things like cars and Steel and other metal production, are convertible to war. Therefore, we should do everything to make sure we are not dependent on Canada for some part of our potential war machine. But you can make your own cars and Steel and other things and sell them to whoever will buy them. Not going to obstruct that, good luck.
Canada is going in exactly the wrong direction about many things. Robots are coming, if from the so called "West" or from East Asia.
So why would you want to fill up your nation with low productivity Imigrants?
I am only speaking truth here. I did not make this map, and I do not think that IQ is the full measure of humans, and I also think there may be a thing called collective IQ: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view … ajaxserp=0 But there is also cultural discomfort. It is very hard to maintain compatibility between groups that may not have the same objectives or view of what reality should be.
If you are not careful, your country will become just a place that sends minerals and energy to other places. America cannot trust you to maintain our standards because you despise our standards.
As for nukes, who are you going to nuke? If you nuke us how do you think that will end?
If you purposely provoke the Russians, then you will get what you disirve.
We can lock you our of much of our market and in the end to turn a buck you will either have to supply your raw materials directly to us or you can supply them to East Asia or Europe and they will sell the resulting products to us.
And as for Energy, it appears that many forms of energy are going to become useful. Solar, geothermal, maybe wind even though I know that Orange Man don't like that. Nuclear? Maybe.
So, we are going to have energy and robots, maybe the robots will kill us all and USA/Canada won't matter.
As for Ukraine, we are trying to look out for their best interests. Both sides. They are all or were all Ukrainians.
Ending
Last edited by Void (2026-10-22 10:06:12)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3305 2026-10-22 10:06:50
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,560
Re: Politics
I think it really sucks that there are literal lakes and rivers of oil and gas on other planets (if that is what we want/need), but many of us are more interested in taking things from each other than we are in putting in the work to go out and stake a claim on a functionally unlimited supply of energy and materials of every description. None of the earnest progress made to explore beyond Earth has enticed anyone else to truly join us on the ultimate adventure. That's why we're doing it. If we don't, nobody else will.
Build your own spaceships. Prove us wrong. We've handed everyone else as much technology as we actually have, but nobody else seems seriously interested in going out and doing for themselves what we've already done. We didn't just do it for ourselves. We did it for everyone. Our civilian leadership didn't allow our military to jealously guard their internet, GPS, microchips, or any other technology that our defense dollars paid for. It's been shared with the world, for better or worse, but true understanding and useful application require real, unglamorous work that involves a lot of blood, sweat, and tears.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3306 2026-10-22 12:23:28
- Calliban
- Member
- From: Northern England, UK
- Registered: 2019-08-18
- Posts: 4,430
Re: Politics
0
I think it really sucks that there are literal lakes and rivers of oil and gas on other planets (if that is what we want/need), but many of us are more interested in taking things from each other than we are in putting in the work to go out and stake a claim on a functionally unlimited supply of energy and materials of every description. None of the earnest progress made to explore beyond Earth has enticed anyone else to truly join us on the ultimate adventure. That's why we're doing it. If we don't, nobody else will.
Build your own spaceships. Prove us wrong. We've handed everyone else as much technology as we actually have, but nobody else seems seriously interested in going out and doing for themselves what we've already done. We didn't just do it for ourselves. We did it for everyone. Our civilian leadership didn't allow our military to jealously guard their internet, GPS, microchips, or any other technology that our defense dollars paid for. It's been shared with the world, for better or worse, but true understanding and useful application require real, unglamorous work that involves a lot of blood, sweat, and tears.
Yeah. I think the reason most people aren't more excited about space colonisation is down to a failure of realisation. Most can't imagine the type of future that we might one day build. The scale of the wealth that awaits us. Too many people have their heads up their own arses, trying to take away from others instead of actually building things themselves. I am sick and tired of the soulless socialist ass holes that run the UK. More than half of everything I make gets lifted from me and given away to other people who did not spend over a decade in higher education and even more time slowly gaining experience in industry. I have a lot more grey hairs than most of the people the same age that couldn't be bothered and would rather just steal from me instead. Those people look at my nice house and nice car and seem to think that someone randomly gave it to me. Not that I worked hard for years to earn it whilst feeding my family. The whole situation in the UK is deeply immoral. The government is essentially an extortion racket.
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
Like button can go here
#3307 2026-10-22 13:33:59
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
kbd512,
The US advertised the race to the Moon as "For all Mankind". The US claimed to be the leader of the free world. Today people like you think it was just America. Canada did participate in Apollo. It was never Russia vs USA; it was Russia and all of their allies vs USA and all of America's allies. The greatest Russian ally was Ukraine. The greatest American ally was Canada. But you conveniently forget that.
As for the Manhattan Project: you also want to believe it was just the US. The fact Canada had developed an efficient means to produce bomb grade plutonium before the Manhattan Project, you conveniently ignore.
You like to brag of all the innovations the US has made, here are some Canadian inventions:
insulin (1922)
cardiac pacemaker (1949/1950)
electron microscope (1938)
CanadArm
Archie (first internet search engine)
IMAX
Blackberry (first smartphone)
Java programming language
snowmobile
baskeball
standardized time
snowblower
paint roller
garbage bag
egg carton
Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone. Many Americans conveniently forget he lived in Ontario at the time. He was born and raised in Scotland. He moved to Canada at age 23 along with his parents and brother's widow. They bought a homestead in Ontario. He setup a workshop in carriage house (today we would call that a garage). He got work in Boston at a school for deaf mutes the following year. He rented an apartment in Boston, and rented space for a workshop. He commuted back and forth between his family home in Ontario and the apartment in Boston.
List of Canadian inventions is far too long to post. Read here...
Wikipedia: List of Canadian inventions, innovations, and discoveries
Offline
Like button can go here
#3308 2026-10-22 15:01:32
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,560
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
You have all the tech, all the know-how, and all the materials required to build your own rockets, space capsules, and whatever military tech you deem necessary for Canadian defense, and good for you. Stop telling me how great you are and go do it. I'm anxiously awaiting a Canadian-launched orbital-class rocket and space capsule. America sent astronauts to the moon in 1969. Everything necessary to repeat what we achieved is available to every Western industrialized nation and many Eastern industrialized nations. Nobody is stopping you but you. Talk is cheap. I want to see some action. Running your mouth at me is not a technical achievement.
People first went into space in the 1950s. It's 2026. Where the hell is everyone else's man-rated rocket and space capsule system?
Offline
Like button can go here
#3309 2026-10-22 19:24:41
- offtherock
- Member
- Registered: 2017-10-26
- Posts: 73
Re: Politics
@kbd512
yeah. and why the fuck doesnt europe starts its own space program right now.
they could team up with canada, australia, new zealand and maybe even india and more.
they have all the resources in the world for it.
building reusable rockets is a question of a few billion euros.
its nothing in the big scheme of things.
its a question of survival.
its interesting that the continent which not long ago, ruled the world.
is now being squeezed by the dictatorships of the world.
Last edited by offtherock (2026-10-22 19:26:30)
Offline
Like button can go here
#3310 2026-10-22 20:46:36
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
Well, luckily NASA administration is not as isolationist as you just demonstrate. NASA wants to work with other countries. And the Mars Society is international, not just US.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3311 2026-10-22 20:49:46
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
With all the wars in the world right now, we appear to require new leadership. A special group of genetically engineered individuals. Taking the best genes from the entire world population. A leader class to lead us to a new world of peace and prosperity. One of the individuals could be conceived with genes from strong leaders from Mongolia and and the Sikh religion of northern India. This individual would be named Khan Noonien Singh. 
Offline
Like button can go here
#3312 2026-10-22 23:09:09
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,560
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
I have nothing against people from other countries doing things the way they want for their own reasons. What I really don't need is people from other countries telling us how to run every aspect of our defense and space exploration programs when they can't launch a single crewed vehicle into orbit, not because they can't figure it out, but because they don't even try. Canada, the UK, and the EU have never seriously attempted to put a man in space. As an American, am I supposed to pretend that there's anything at all stopping them from doing it, apart from their unwillingness to commit and then face the possibility of failure? For goodness sake, New Zealand's own rocket entrepreneur is closing in on manned spaceflight capability. Canadians and Europeans could even use NASA facilities for testing and launches, and NASA would help them (giving them unrestricted access to the best facilities, equipment, data, and subject-matter experts money can buy), but they haven't even tried.
When I look across the pond or across the fence to our neighbors, that's what I see- people who are perfectly capable and want for nothing in any real sense, but haven't even tried, because they're unwilling, afraid of failure, more interested in funding their next antisocial program, "saving the world" from "the weather" by playing an elaborate game of pretend, and other similarly trivial pursuits that haven't amounted to a hill of beans. It's all ridiculously silly nonsense.
Let's enter an alternate timeline where you convinced your fellow Canadians to actually build some Arrow Mk II fighter jets and real orbital-class rockets. At least you would have built your own fighter jets instead of blaming Americans for a decision your own government made before you were born. When American fighter jets fall apart, I don't shake my finger at the Mexicans and blame them for our own lack of fighter jet production. I ask my own government why they haven't designed and built any new fighter jets. The Europeans had SCAF and FCAS, both arguably better than 25-year-old F-22s with 30- to 40-year-old electronics tech, then argued with each other to the point that they stopped working on both projects altogether. What was the point of that? Billions spent, years squandered, and still no new European fighter jets. At least back during the Cold War, they didn't need to be convinced of the importance of at least giving the appearance of being a tough opponent for the Russians to face down.
I can respect "really tried but failed anyway".
I do respect "tried, failed, and continued trying until success was achieved" much more.
I can't respect "didn't even try", because there's no objective reality where that counts as an earnest effort.
The Soviets gave up on building N1 moon rockets after 4 of them blew up over a period of several years. SpaceX blew up more rockets than that during a single year, but kept trying until they got it right. All that effort. All those brilliant men and women. All the lives lost. They just gave up.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3313 2026-10-23 07:21:42
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
You like "really tried but failed anyway"? Ok. UK is a member of the European Space Agency. They developed the Ariane 5 launch vehicle to launch a capsule with crew to Low Earth Orbit. They also tried to develop a capsule. It was cancelled more for politics than anything technical. It became the ATV cargo ship, which delivered pressurized cargo to ISS. The service module for ATV is currently used by Orion to carry crew to Lunar orbit.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3314 2026-10-23 07:40:03
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
The problem with military budget is Donald Trump demanding every country allied with the US increase their military budget. This started in Trump's first term when he demanded NATO members pay their "fair share" into NATO. But that's not how NATO works. NATO is an alliance. Each country pays for its own military, that's all. But each member country is committed to defend each other. Furthermore, the US wanted to be the only one with nuclear weapons. UK and France built their own nuclear weapons anyway; after what happened in WWII they absolutely had to. But after WWII, at Bretton Woods, the US offered to patrol the ocean to put an end to piracy. And the US offered military defence to Europe and many other countries, in order to promote freedom, democracy, and free-market economies. This was to fight against the spread of Communism. For NATO, the agreement even allowed a US general to be the Supreme Allied Commander who could give orders to the military of other nations in the alliance. The US would never accept orders from other members, only give them. Nations in Europe accepted this in exchange for the US providing military defence on their soil. US bases in Germany were used primarily to base operations against Middle East countries, not defence of Europe. So not exactly what Europe expected. But no one complained. Now Trump doesn't like it. He's transactional, he doesn't understand how an alliance works.
My point is in times of peace, the US can reduce its military budget unilaterally. Stop telling other countries they have to increase their military budget just so the US can reduce theirs. This isn't about supporting US defence contractors. Other NATO members reduced their military budget to where it should be for times of peace. So Trump was out of line to tell them to increase theirs.
Now that Russia is on the rampage, started war to recapture everything that was under Russian control at the height of the Cold War, other NATO members must increase their budget. This wouldn't be necessary if the US had honoured its commitments under treaties.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3315 2026-10-23 08:32:54
- Calliban
- Member
- From: Northern England, UK
- Registered: 2019-08-18
- Posts: 4,430
Re: Politics
I think Trump is correct in expecting other countries to fund their own defence. How is it fair to expect US taxpayers to do this? After WW2, the Americans footed most of the bill for western defence against the communist east. Other countries contributed, but the US was the biggest military force absolutely and per capita. This had a lot of benefits. It allowed the globalised economic system to develop. The US navy opened and policed sea lanes. They permitted a huge expansion in commercial shipping. The whole world got a lot richer as a result. But serving as global policeman was always a raw deal for the average US man. Vietnam showed just how much of a raw deal it was.
The US can't really do it anymore. The world has changed. Globalisation means that the West no longer has absolute technological superiority. US demographics have changed. It doesn't have as many fighting age men in good enough health as it once did. The US industrial structure has also changed in a way that makes maintaining a war machine more difficult and expensive. We can see the difficulty the Americans are having fighting a war against what everyone assumed was a lightweight power (Iran). It is time to acknowledge the new reality of a multipolar world. Even if the US were willing to help other western countries face down bad actors like Russia, China and Iran, they don't have the capacity to do it on their own anymore. And it is a bad idea to depend on a dwindling military power for your defence.
Canada, UK, Australia and NZ, could work together to build a close military, economic and technological alliance. Collectively, we could build a much more capable navy than any one of these countries could individually. We could build actual carrier groups, for example. We could afford to finance development of Gen 5/6 fighter jets, missile defence and drone warfare. It would also mean that against genuine threats to global trade (like Iran) the west could mount a far more effective military response than the US can only it's own. Since we all need the oil, the fertiliser and NG coming out of the Persian gulf, it would be in our mutual benefit to team up and deal with this threat.
Last edited by Calliban (2026-10-23 08:45:40)
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
Like button can go here
#3316 2026-10-23 08:42:41
- offtherock
- Member
- Registered: 2017-10-26
- Posts: 73
Re: Politics
the core argument in all military spending. be it american or others.
is that we are vastly stronger together, than divided.
thats what putin and xi know.
thats why they finance all these bs campaigns on social media to get ppl in the west to hate each other.
and trump has just been their wildest dream.
nothing has divided, broken and weakened the west, like trump.
Last edited by offtherock (2026-10-23 08:44:25)
Offline
Like button can go here
#3317 2026-10-23 09:08:44
- Calliban
- Member
- From: Northern England, UK
- Registered: 2019-08-18
- Posts: 4,430
Re: Politics
the core argument in all military spending. be it american or others.
is that we are vastly stronger together, than divided.thats what putin and xi know.
thats why they finance all these bs campaigns on social media to get ppl in the west to hate each other.and trump has just been their wildest dream.
nothing has divided, broken and weakened the west, like trump.
I suppose that his success can only be judged against what he was trying to do in the first place. He has not been very successful in reshoring US manufacturing. Mainly because his trade policies have changed according to his mood. Tariffs are not an automatically bad thing. But changing tariff policy regularly and using them as political weapons against other nations is a very bad idea. Businesses need to make investments with payback periods that last decades. A trade policy that changes constantly makes it impossible to invest, because a change in tariff rates can easily pull the rug from an investment that made financial sense yesterday, but no longer does when tariff rate doubles overnight. Trump should have set out his tariff policy at the beginning of his term and made it clear that it wouldn't change again while he was in office. Investors hate uncertainty.
In my opinion, disrupting trade between the three NAFTA partners was the most damaging thing Trump did. I am fully behind his efforts to deal with illegal immigration. I think reshoring manufacturing is a good idea. But manufacturing within NAFTA was a cross-border business. Putting up tariff barriers has turned the North American business model on its head. The Greenland Saga peed off European allies over a place that really isn't worth very much.
Last edited by Calliban (2026-10-23 09:18:39)
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
Like button can go here
#3318 2026-10-23 10:20:45
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,993
Re: Politics
I feel that the results of Greenland are exactly perfect. We got necessary rights even if all of Europe and Greenland turn Commie Socialist, and we did a pinch test and found out that Europeans and Canadians indeed are low trust entities. And I feel we left the Nordics with enough that they should not be distressed.
As for other factors, at this time I support MAGA, as I see no reason to be against them. As for the democrats, I believe that they have always wanted to be the "Ruling Class People" on top of plantation cultural arrangements. To them European types that simply want to have a commoner's nation, are rabble. And so under no circumstance will I like foreign powers who want to align with the plantation owners.
My state seems to be taken over by outsiders of the plantation orientation. We were a free people but these outsiders came here to exploit us, put us under their servant classes. Pure disgust. And they have tried to do the same thing to the Nordics.
I believe that the base problem is from the European farmer and Steppe populations of Europe. When behaving badly the cities of the Romanoids, behave like whores. The feminine process supposes that it will be ruling class and exploit the masculine. At this time they have supposed that their social elevation will keep them safe from any sort of underlings that they may import as servant people. (See France, it does not work well when you are stupid about it).
A Northern or more Asiatic position is to have community with boundaries on the sides, not vertical class boundaries.
Our objectives are to not be enslaved vertically or horizontally. Romanoid or Russianoid.
Since we have discovered vast trust issues with Europe and Canada, and these two entities have been stupid enough to endanger themselves, we need to seek self reliance.
But at this time Canadian and American politics are starting to bleed into each other. It suggests an eventual merger of some kind, but I feel it is very far off if at all.
So, we will have a revulsion and lack of trust for Canada. Deal with them only as much as necessary.
Ending
Last edited by Void (2026-10-23 10:34:00)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3319 2026-10-23 12:58:02
- Yuri Pilipishin
- Member
- From: Lviv, Ukraine
- Registered: 2017-05-21
- Posts: 40
- Website
Re: Politics
If you purposely provoke the Russians, then you will get what you disirve.
To put it mildly, this isn't entirely true. The overwhelming majority of Ukrainians would like to live in a sovereign country under their own laws, governed by their own government, and protected by their own armed forces. Muscovites perceive this as an intolerable provocation, as they want to conquer Ukraine and destroy Ukrainian identity, and they say so openly. But we're not alone; for example, Muscovites also hate the United States as an idea, and they say so openly. They simply don't have the strength right now to perceive the American way of life as an intolerable provocation. And there are other countries that Moscow hates, but of course, Moscow isn't so foolish as to fight them all at once, so all the other potential enemies are now receiving reassuring messages like "Moscow has no intention of fighting anyone else and won't go further than Ukraine." We received similar false assurances from Moscow before the war; it's simply a stratagem. I am writing all this to explain that Moscow should not be allowed to restore its Evil Empire, because if the free world allows this, all the foundations of the free world may one day also be perceived by Moscow as an unacceptable provocation.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3320 2026-10-23 14:13:05
- HG Muller
- Member
- Registered: 2017-06-17
- Posts: 36
Re: Politics
A people that is dumb enough to elect convicted criminals and pathological liars as their leaders should never be trusted. There is no point in allying with a state that can betray you at any time. Europe and Canada should strive for severing all ties with the U.S. at the earliest possible moment, kick out their troops, close their bases, and stop trading with them. Very soon they won't have anything to trade anyway, as they are rapidly ruining their economy and military, and will soon be bankrupt. (I.e. hyper-inflation of the dollar is forthcoming.)
Offline
Like button can go here
#3321 2026-10-23 16:09:55
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,993
Re: Politics
That will be in interesting world if you can get it.
People who can turn against us at the drop of a pin, are they people we should trust our fate to? Yuri Pilipishin, I can accept your feelings.
HG Muller, yours seems only emotional and not logical. Quote:
HG Muller
Member
Registered: 2017-06-17
Posts: 31
A people that is dumb enough to elect convicted criminals and pathological liars as their leaders should never be trusted. There is no point in allying with a state that can betray you at any time. Europe and Canada should strive for severing all ties with the U.S. at the earliest possible moment, kick out their troops, close their bases, and stop trading with them. Very soon they won't have anything to trade anyway, as they are rapidly ruining their economy and military, and will soon be bankrupt. (I.e. hyper-inflation of the dollar is forthcoming.)
You think Carney is upright? Throw us out? Thanks for the favor in that case.
The logical way for America to act at this point is to understand that it is not in our interest to have Canadians make products for our Market unless necessary. In that case for the USA then Canada will have only mining, and perhaps the export of electricity to the USA.
As for Europe and East Asia, you expect that they will share market with Canada? Well OK maybe Canada can makes Cars for Europe and China. Is that likely? How about Steel, will China want to buy Canadian steel products? Well, good for them if they can do that. Perhaps we will bake them a cake to celebrate in that case.
It is not that we have malice to return to Canada, it is that the more we examine the situation the more it becomes evident that we should not allow them any more agency to affect our fate than we may be forced to.
A very interesting world that, then 15 million Indians imported to Canada to work in sweat shops? Making what? Or will Europeans and Euroaliens migrate to Canada as well. Well, an interesting concept. I wonder how well Quebec will be able to maintain French type culture in that case?
I guess if they want to they can move in that direction. They can move in Hindu and Moslems who will likely speak English more often than French.
In some ways long term that might work for the USA as it offsets our nice Latin American mostly Christian neighbors.
As for Transport, I guess Electric Semi may be perhaps 1/2 the cost of Diesel. So, then you can ship stuff to a coast with that and rails, and then you can load on and off ships at least twice. Then transport inside of another continent. Have fun, make it work.
The USA will probably still work with Canada, but only if it makes money sense.
Some here don't believe in solar energy, but I think you will agree that on average the USA will do better with it than Canada or Europe. At least it looks that way. So, then we could fuel Electric Semi with that electricity. And for the moment it looks like we can do a lot with Latin America.
Do your own good, make it work and we will congratulate you.
Ending
Last edited by Void (2026-10-23 16:30:44)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3322 2026-10-23 16:43:26
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,615
- Website
Re: Politics
The logical way for America to act at this point is to understand that it is not in our interest to have Canadians make products for our Market unless necessary. In that case for the USA then Canada will have only mining, and perhaps the export of electricity to the USA.
Backwards. It's in America's best interest to re-shore manufacturing from China, India, southeast Asia, etc. Bring manufacturing to North America. Strengthen economic ties with Canada and Mexico.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3323 2026-10-23 19:35:04
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,993
Re: Politics
That is in the hands of the leaderships, good or bad. Mexico is a for sure, as they still have their relatively young people, and to some degree they are rather compatible with our culture.
Canada however does not have its own young people and like the monarchy these days does not have loyalty to Christianity, or its former Canadian nature. Canada does not think like a republic, in fact I am quite sure that the crowns representatives have worked very hard to foster anything else. Canada wants to bring in what we consider dangerous people just to virtue signal.
Foreign powers world wide have been trying to break America, and that includes the Fabians, I believe. The globalist agenda tried to kill fracking with false representations of it's nature, and now it seems by serendipity geothermal power may become something.
The game play of monarchists, and communists, Fabians, and traditional hierarchy is to extract as much wealth from the minions, such as to keep them barely able to serve and so to be obedient for small crusts of bread allowed for them. The gentlemen farmers of England despised industry. So, you see there are concerns about incompatibility. You don't seem to want to go to the same place as we do. We don't care to become surfs.
America and places like it, favor the creation of wealth.
So, if we are traveling different paths, then we maybe should become less entangled.
The leadership however, good or bad will guide each nation.
Ending
Last edited by Void (2026-10-23 19:42:32)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3324 2026-10-23 22:40:39
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,560
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
They also tried to develop a capsule. It was cancelled more for politics than anything technical.
Yes, there's a distinct pattern to European behavior. Any time their politics are involved, all useful progress stops. That's why they have no space capsule, no lunar landing, and no stealth fighter jets. Orion may be a functional failure for budgetary and timeline reasons, but it's carried the only people back to the moon in over 50 years. Everyone else is too terrified to even try, or their politics overrode all useful progress.
The problem with military budget is Donald Trump demanding every country allied with the US increase their military budget. This started in Trump's first term when he demanded NATO members pay their "fair share" into NATO.
False and False, like most of your false claims and assertions.
NATO members signed an agreement pledging to spend a certain percentage of their GDP on their military. They reneged on their agreements and made no attempt to renegotiate.
This did not start during President Trump's first term. Representatives from the administrations of President Clinton, President Bush, and President Obama all publicly requested that European nations honor their defense spending agreements.
But that's not how NATO works. NATO is an alliance. Each country pays for its own military, that's all. But each member country is committed to defend each other.
Military alliances aren't worthwhile if their members don't demonstrate good faith commitment to the alliance.
Furthermore, the US wanted to be the only one with nuclear weapons.
The US had just finished WWII. Retaining sole custody of nuclear weapons on behalf of NATO nations was a prudent precaution at that time.
For NATO, the agreement even allowed a US general to be the Supreme Allied Commander who could give orders to the military of other nations in the alliance.
Eisenhower was the Supreme Allied Commander during WWII.
The US would never accept orders from other members, only give them.
False again. American forces are placed under the jurisdiction of foreign NATO commanders on a routine basis, but you know nothing about how the military actually works and don't care to know because it doesn't align with your beliefs about America, the American military, or even how allied military organizations actually work as a general principle.
US bases in Germany were used primarily to base operations against Middle East countries, not defence of Europe.
Which NATO nation demanded that the US go to war in the Middle East?
Now Trump doesn't like it. He's transactional, he doesn't understand how an alliance works.
The civilian populace in America was never asked whether we agreed to send our soldiers to fight on behalf of foreign nations.
My point is in times of peace, the US can reduce its military budget unilaterally.
My point is that the American people and their government reject your point unilaterally.
Stop telling other countries they have to increase their military budget just so the US can reduce theirs.
Someone has to be a real adult, even while others are behaving like children. Enemies attack under two different circumstances. The first is when you're prepared for the attack. The second is when you're unprepared. Americans have learned the hard way to never be unprepared.
This isn't about supporting US defence contractors.
Support your own defense contractors by designing, developing, procuring, and using your own military hardware. Not so long ago, Canada had its own military rifles, armored vehicles, and fighter jets.
Other NATO members reduced their military budget to where it should be for times of peace.
According to someone who is now whining that the US hasn't done enough to support Ukraine.
So Trump was out of line to tell them to increase theirs.
If Trump is out of line for telling other nations to pay for their own defense, then you're out of line for telling Americans what we should spend on our defense.
Now that Russia is on the rampage, started war to recapture everything that was under Russian control at the height of the Cold War, other NATO members must increase their budget.
I hear a lot of talking. I don't see much else going on.
This wouldn't be necessary if the US had honoured its commitments under treaties.
NATO members pledged to spend 5% of GDP on defense decades before President Trump took office. You keep trying to avoid any personal responsibility, like a typical European. As an American, I'm not having any of it. When you're ready to admit that European nations first reneged on their signed mutual defense agreements that had nothing to do with President Trump, and did so for decades, then we can have an actual honest conversation about what America is obligated to do to defend European countries that signed agreements they did not honor. If the Europeans don't want American involvement, we would be overjoyed to leave the Europeans to their own devices. I would love to have all of our troops and equipment removed from Europe, never to return.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3325 2026-10-23 22:59:57
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,560
Re: Politics
Dr Muller,
A people that is dumb enough to elect convicted criminals and pathological liars as their leaders should never be trusted.
A person who is dumb enough to think we elected a convicted criminal IS a pathological liar and should never be trusted.
There is no point in allying with a state that can betray you at any time.
Agreed!
Europe and Canada should strive for severing all ties with the U.S. at the earliest possible moment, kick out their troops, close their bases, and stop trading with them.
Stop threatening us with a good time.
Very soon they won't have anything to trade anyway, as they are rapidly ruining their economy and military, and will soon be bankrupt. (I.e. hyper-inflation of the dollar is forthcoming.)
I don't want to trade with ungrateful, self-absorbed clowns. You'll destroy yourselves long before the US or Russia ever could. Europeans did that twice in a single century. History doesn't repeat, but it sure does seem to rhyme.
Offline
Like button can go here