Discussion:
President Musk
Add Reply
Hibou
2025-01-07 13:22:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.

I plan to use it whenever I can.
occam
2025-01-07 13:43:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk. The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets. Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who
recently forked out over 4 billion on X-Twitter. That ill-judged
investment is proving quite useful, for now.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2025-01-07 14:32:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk.
As long as that? If he gets called President Musk's assistant enough
times he may decide that his boss needs to be terminated. Whether he
has the cognitive ability to do that remains to be seen, however.
Post by occam
The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets. Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who
recently forked out over 4 billion on X-Twitter. That ill-judged
investment is proving quite useful, for now.
--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.
Rich Ulrich
2025-01-07 17:07:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk.
Yesterday, I read the opinion that Musk is rapidly headed towards
becoming the biggest soure of disinformation of all time. I assume,
they mean he would displace Trump. Can they remain in sync?

Trump seemed to follow Musk's lead on the budget, and again
on the work visas for educated immigrants. Trump's selection of
multiple billionaires for his cabinet leads me to believe that Trump
is unduly impressed by people who are richer than he is.
Post by occam
The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets.
Musk has gone international in a way that Trump has not. News
reports say that several European countries are trying to figure
what to do about his rants.
Post by occam
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who
recently forked out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4. I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks
more reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -

According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to
in a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion
on their Twitter takeover. That's right.

Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
Post by occam
That ill-judged
investment is proving quite useful, for now.
--
Rich Ulrich
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2025-01-07 17:23:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich Ulrich
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk.
Yesterday, I read the opinion that Musk is rapidly headed towards
becoming the biggest soure of disinformation of all time. I assume,
they mean he would displace Trump. Can they remain in sync?
Trump seemed to follow Musk's lead on the budget, and again
on the work visas for educated immigrants. Trump's selection of
multiple billionaires for his cabinet leads me to believe that Trump
is unduly impressed by people who are richer than he is.
Post by occam
The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets.
Musk has gone international in a way that Trump has not. News
reports say that several European countries are trying to figure
what to do about his rants.
The UK and Germany in particular. He hasn't yet favoured us with his
advice on how tomake France a better place, or maybe I have just not
heard about it.
Post by Rich Ulrich
Post by occam
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who
recently forked out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4. I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks
more reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -
According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to
in a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion
on their Twitter takeover. That's right.
Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
Post by occam
That ill-judged
investment is proving quite useful, for now.
--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.
Tony Cooper
2025-01-07 19:06:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Rich Ulrich
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk.
Yesterday, I read the opinion that Musk is rapidly headed towards
becoming the biggest soure of disinformation of all time. I assume,
they mean he would displace Trump. Can they remain in sync?
Trump seemed to follow Musk's lead on the budget, and again
on the work visas for educated immigrants. Trump's selection of
multiple billionaires for his cabinet leads me to believe that Trump
is unduly impressed by people who are richer than he is.
Post by occam
The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets.
Musk has gone international in a way that Trump has not. News
reports say that several European countries are trying to figure
what to do about his rants.
The UK and Germany in particular. He hasn't yet favoured us with his
advice on how tomake France a better place, or maybe I have just not
heard about it.
It's just a matter of time. Macron has criticized Musk for
interfering with other European country's politics. Musk is not one
to accept criticism without retaliation.

Have you checked Jordan Bardella's travel plans lately? Any upcoming
trips scheduled to Florida?
occam
2025-01-07 17:45:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich Ulrich
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk.
Yesterday, I read the opinion that Musk is rapidly headed towards
becoming the biggest soure of disinformation of all time. I assume,
they mean he would displace Trump. Can they remain in sync?
Trump seemed to follow Musk's lead on the budget, and again
on the work visas for educated immigrants. Trump's selection of
multiple billionaires for his cabinet leads me to believe that Trump
is unduly impressed by people who are richer than he is.
Post by occam
The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets.
Musk has gone international in a way that Trump has not. News
reports say that several European countries are trying to figure
what to do about his rants.
Post by occam
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who
recently forked out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4.
Yes, my bad. $44 billion it was, and he knew he had overpaid grossly. So
much for judgement. I'm quite sure his error of judgement of character
(Trump) is even worse than his business blunder.
Post by Rich Ulrich
I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks
more reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -
According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to
in a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion
on their Twitter takeover. That's right.
Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
Post by occam
That ill-judged
investment is proving quite useful, for now.
Peter Moylan
2025-01-07 23:35:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich Ulrich
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who recently forked
out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4. I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks more
reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -
According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to in
a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion on
their Twitter takeover. That's right.
Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
That ill-judged investment is proving quite useful, for now.
As I understand it, Musk bought Twitter for the sole reason of removing
the ban on Trump. Did Trump start using Twitter again? I thought he had
moved over to an echo chamber of his own.
--
Peter Moylan ***@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
Rich Ulrich
2025-01-08 06:58:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Rich Ulrich
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who recently forked
out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4. I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks more
reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -
According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to in
a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion on
their Twitter takeover. That's right.
Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
That ill-judged investment is proving quite useful, for now.
As I understand it, Musk bought Twitter for the sole reason of removing
the ban on Trump. Did Trump start using Twitter again? I thought he had
moved over to an echo chamber of his own.
Trump has been allowed back on X-Twitter. He uses it far less than
he used to; I think he uses Truth Social more. I just read that he
has a bigger audience on X than on TS. But Musk was noted as
having a couple hundred million followers (of egregious lies) during
the end of the recent campaign.

Trump started Truth Social, whose assets consists of about $2 billion
raised by stock offering of 35% of the total shares at ~$50/share,
and Trump as person who posts. It still lacks advertisers, etc.
Had he had not been re-elected, I expected him eventually to
dissolve the company so he could walk away with most of the
billions raised -- He has boasted of coming out ahead after his
casino bankruptcies, which he forced because that offered him
the chance for that profit.

[Google]
TS Stock is now about $35. It peaked again above $50 in late October,
which resulted in this report -
Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG) is now valued at over $10
billion after its shares more than quadrupled since late September.
Meanwhile, X Holdings, which was taken private two years ago, is
valued at around $9.4 billion, based on the most recent value the
investment group Fidelity assigned to its stake in the company.

I don't know what X has done since October, but I read that
users and advertisers have been bailing; so maybe that $4 billion
estimate (which I didn't trust) isn't far off for the current value.
--
Rich Ulrich
occam
2025-01-08 11:10:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who recently forked
out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4.  I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks more
reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -
According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to in
a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion on
their Twitter takeover. That's right.
Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
That ill-judged investment is proving quite useful, for now.
As I understand it, Musk bought Twitter for the sole reason of removing
the ban on Trump.
Ouch. 'Sole reason' ? That's a bit far fetched. $44 billion is a high
price to pay to unblock one covfefe moron. He probably paid that amount
for the same reason Rupert Murdoch paid a lot of money buying
newspapers. X is the most efficient way of spreading information today.
Newspapers, on the other hand, are on the slippery down slope.
Post by Peter Moylan
Did Trump start using Twitter again? I thought he had
moved over to an echo chamber of his own.
occam
2025-01-08 11:10:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who recently forked
out over 4 billion on X-Twitter.
Umm... He paid $44 billion, not 4.  I saw "$4 billion" asserted a
while back as how much X-Twitter is worth today, but this looks more
reliable - [Google, November 24, Yahoo Finance] -
According to the most recent available numbers, which we'll get to in
a bit, Musk and his co-investors have lost more than $25 billion on
their Twitter takeover. That's right.
Pundits do say that its value continues to drop.
That ill-judged investment is proving quite useful, for now.
As I understand it, Musk bought Twitter for the sole reason of removing
the ban on Trump.
Ouch. 'Sole reason' ? That's a bit far fetched. $44 billion is a high
price to pay to unblock one covfefe moron. He probably paid that amount
for the same reason Rupert Murdoch paid a lot of money buying
newspapers. X is the most efficient way of spreading information today.
Newspapers, on the other hand, are on the slippery down slope.
Post by Peter Moylan
Did Trump start using Twitter again? I thought he had
moved over to an echo chamber of his own.
Snidely
2025-01-07 21:30:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
I give him (Trump) six months before he falls out with Musk.
If that doesn't happen, I expect Musk will make too many enemies among
the Congressional Republicans, and be deposed.
Post by occam
The BBC now
invariable refers to Musk as 'the world's richest man'. It is the de
facto honorific for the man who appears to ruffle politicians' feathers
with his tweets. Not bad for an unelected autistic technocrat who
recently forked out over 4
[sic]
Post by occam
billion on X-Twitter. That ill-judged
investment is proving quite useful, for now.
And the creative application of "freedom of speech".

/dps
--
Courage is knowing it might hurt, and doing it anyway.
Stupidity is the same.
And that's why life is hard.
-- the World Wide Web
Janet
2025-01-07 14:12:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
The interesting question is, which lunatic will sack the
other one first.

Janet
occam
2025-01-07 14:56:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Janet
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
The interesting question is, which lunatic will sack the
other one first.
You have to remember that Twitter sacked Trump once already. It may
happen again, under the new management.


Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Sam Plusnet
2025-01-07 18:12:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Janet
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
The interesting question is, which lunatic will sack the
other one first.
You have to remember that Twitter sacked Trump once already. It may
happen again, under the new management.
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Musk has caused some amusement in the UK.
Nigel Farage has done a splendid job of sucking up to Musk - only for
Musk to say he's useless, and should be replaced as head of the Reform
UK 'party'.
--
Sam Plusnet
Hibou
2025-01-08 12:36:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?

The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
occam
2025-01-08 14:09:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
Hibou
2025-01-09 06:49:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
occam
2025-01-09 07:30:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
<smile> Yes. And there are the intra-family conflicts to consider.
Tony Cooper and his brother come to mind. Those Thanksgiving dinners are
not going to get any easier.
Peter Moylan
2025-01-09 09:57:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
It gets worse. According to the NATO treaty, the US will have an
obligation to help fight off the US invaders.
--
Peter Moylan ***@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
Snidely
2025-01-09 20:36:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
It gets worse. According to the NATO treaty, the US will have an
obligation to help fight off the US invaders.
Trump appears to not be a fan of NATO, and seems to have been
advocating, during the recent campaign, withdrawing from it. Probably
because NATO is annoying his friend Vlad about [the] Ukraine.

/dps
--
Rule #0: Don't be on fire.
In case of fire, exit the building before tweeting about it.
(Sighting reported by Adam F)
Anders D. Nygaard
2025-01-09 23:37:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
We're both too old to be conscripted.
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
It gets worse. According to the NATO treaty, the US will have an
obligation to help fight off the US invaders.
And who is going to force them to honour that obligation?

/Anders, Denmark
occam
2025-01-10 08:59:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
We're both too old to be conscripted.
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
It gets worse. According to the NATO treaty, the US will have an
obligation to help fight off the US invaders.
And who is going to force them to honour that obligation?
No one. You're quite right. If the US pulls out of NATO, NATO becomes a
toothless organisation. No adequate funding, not binding force between
its members (e.g. Greece and Turkey are sworn enemies) and certainly no
coherent strategy. A look at the NATO membership shows that most of them
are hangers on. (Aside- the Luxembourg 'contribution' to NATO forces
includes < 1000 personnel, of which a quarter a musicians.)
Aidan Kehoe
2025-01-10 09:10:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
[...] No one. You're quite right. If the US pulls out of NATO, NATO becomes
a toothless organisation. No adequate funding, not binding force between its
members (e.g. Greece and Turkey are sworn enemies) and certainly no coherent
strategy. A look at the NATO membership shows that most of them are hangers
on. (Aside- the Luxembourg 'contribution' to NATO forces includes < 1000
personnel, of which a quarter a musicians.)
It does include some fairly expensive aircraft.

There was a secret agreement in the 1950s, still in force, that the UK would
take over a certain amount of the defence responsibilities of the Republic of
Ireland. On learning this (about 10 years ago) I was very irritated; I hadn’t
been in favour of Ireland joining NATO before that but I am now.
--
‘As I sat looking up at the Guinness ad, I could never figure out /
How your man stayed up on the surfboard after fourteen pints of stout’
(C. Moore)
J. J. Lodder
2025-01-10 10:17:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
We're both too old to be conscripted.
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Hibou
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
It gets worse. According to the NATO treaty, the US will have an
obligation to help fight off the US invaders.
And who is going to force them to honour that obligation?
The commander in chief of all NATO forces
is by tradition an American general.
He reports to the Chair of the NATO Military Committee,
(at present lieutenant admiral Rob Bauer)
who reports to the NATO secretary general,
by tradition an European civilian. (at present Mark Rutte)

By coincidence both top positions are held by Dutchmen at present.
Both will no doubt tell Trump that he will have to get out of NATO
before he can threaten military action against a NATO country.

It will take a reorganisation of the entire American command structure.
The American general in charge of NATO units
(both American and non-American)
does not have Trump as commander in chief,

Jan

J. J. Lodder
2025-01-09 12:24:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
...and will Denmark call on Bertel to defend against the invasion?
Spare a thought for those with dual nationality - who could be
conscripted by both sides, and might have to fight themselves.
Why dual nationality?
American generals and troops, commanded ultimately by Trump,
and under political responsibility of Trump
will have to fight American generals commanding NATO forces,
partly American, under the political responsibility of Mark Rutte,

Jan
J. J. Lodder
2025-01-09 08:17:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
Against the NATO forces defending it?

Jan
Hibou
2025-01-09 08:36:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
Against the NATO forces defending it?
Well, that's an interesting point. Since Greenland is in NATO, if
America attacked it, America would have to come to its defence.

I was drawing a parallel with Putin¹, of course, whose army has proven
so useless that it now has North Korean help.

¹When pronounced Poo-tin, it reminds me of chamber pot.

Anyway, I expect his Greenland plan will go the way of the Mexican wall.
Churchill built walls as a hobby; Hadrian built his so well that much of
it is still there today; Trump, true to form, didn't quite manage it.
He's all wind and no bagpipes.
Bertel Lund Hansen
2025-01-09 10:19:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Hibou
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
Against the NATO forces defending it?
Well, that's an interesting point. Since Greenland is in NATO, if
America attacked it, America would have to come to its defence.
I was drawing a parallel with Putin¹, of course, whose army has proven
so useless that it now has North Korean help.
Did that improve the army?
--
Bertel
Kolt, Denmark
J. J. Lodder
2025-01-09 21:45:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Hibou
Post by occam
Given the choice between the two nincompoops, I'd go with the unelected
president Musk. He has at least proved himself a leader of smart people.
Trump has only rednecks and republicans that support him.
Rednecks or orange necks?
The question in my mind today is this: when Trump invades Greenland,
will he call on South Korean troops to help?
Against the NATO forces defending it?
Well, that's an interesting point. Since Greenland is in NATO, if
America attacked it, America would have to come to its defence.
The Netherlands has experience with it,
ever since the 'The Hague Invasion Act' was signed into law.
If it ever is invoked they'll have (perhaps American) NATO troops
treaty-bound to defend them against American invaders.

We'll see what happens when Isreali servicemen,
or Netanyahu himself will in The Hague
to stand trial for crimes against humanity.

The 'The Hague Invasion Act' doesn't cover that,
but Trump may well try to extend it.
The Netherlands has no choice in the matter:
They are treaty-bound to uphold the integrety of the court.

Jan
Bertietaylor
2025-01-08 02:02:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Hibou
It seems the appellation 'President Musk' annoys Vice-President-elect Trump.
I plan to use it whenever I can.
Thus giving the chap undeserved political power as well.
Our bet is that Trump will give the srchpolluter Musk the boot asap.

Bertietaylor
Loading...