Donald Trump negotiates normally, from above. This is the only effective method with the Russians or the Chinese. You gotta start with maximum demands and then go down. We start with requests like this: we drop an atom on you, burn the cities, plow, a surviving leg won't come out. And then, during the negotiations, we reduce the threats until we scope a compromise that is sustainable. Of course, there are nuances here, for example, we must have the anticipation to carry out threats and those must believe that we will actually implement them. You can't fool around.
This is how the last position towards Ukraine and the second position towards the European Union must be understood. The situation is developing so dynamically that man (and dragon) is incapable to address all crucial aspects. Now there will be a series of digressions that will highlight:
1. Remember, Ochrana's break-up tactics: they send extremist provokers who destruct the environment by attacking radicalism. Look who's attacking the Law and Justice for pro-Russianism? That's why you don't gotta follow what you say, but what you do. The writers, for example, bought tanks, established WOTs, and the pews questioned these purchases, previously keeping us in a permanent state of defencelessness towards Russia. Bronek talked about helping allies here. I've written about it many times, and now I mention it due to the fact that it matters now.
2. I callback the writing doctrine of moral enhancement, which was one more time interestingly discussed on Xsie:
]]>https://x.com/JanSadkiewicz/status/1706382391365787907]]>
And it is now raised by EU factors to defy Trump's decisive actions:
]]>https://x.com/lquarzecha/status/1890076525074223170]]>
Union supporters are flexing their muscles here, telling how ZSRS has 440 million people and the US only 330, Russia only 140. What they're not. How they should get to Russia with sanctions and effective assistance to Ukraine.
Meanwhile, the reality is completely different, so I must make a short exegesis of Trump and his vice president J.D. Vance:
The bitter fact is that the EU has nothing. She utilized an American protective umbrella to reduce European defence spending. And Trump made it clear that it was over, right after the line of the above ecrocoholchosic propaganda. You're expected to be spending on arms, and since you have so many millions of people, build yourself 12 atomic aircraft carriers, frigates, submarines, make tanks, etc., strategical bombers like ants. In short, armies of EU countries should have a force equal to the US Army. Now they'll most likely add a compensation for the past 25 years of negligence.
The EU's function is tearing up robes and mazes of moral values. But that's not what you expect. Trump expects a circumstantial offer: taking over backing aid to Ukraine, that is, the Union will pay the US for arms for Ukraine. The Union has nothing (Germany has 300 tanks, for example), no ammunition factories, etc. But there's no money, and he's not gonna take over the funding, 'cause you're welcome. Yes, weapons have been diverted to the standard of life, but late they have been freezing everything to green order, closing mines, windmills, combating climate, etc. And there isn't. Therefore, this visceral resident can afford occurrences causing white fever of totality.
Now Trump calls Putin and sets up behind his back due to the fact that the U.S. is backing help. As if the EU were backing aid, von der Leyen could call and find not behind Ukraine's back. Is it worth the cost? Does it pay off?
In turn, at the beginning of the russian invasion, I noticed that the PiS should request to make Russia's defence an EU precedence and redirect funds from windmills to tanks. The PiS didn't do it, and now they do. There is no common interest between Central Europe and the rest. Germany is dependent on Russian natural materials and Chinese intermediates. In general, they will give the land east of the Putin Vistula without major problems in exchange for the gas utilized to manage Europe. Russia is not seen by Western Europe as a threat, which I have repeatedly written about. But it's a pea against the wall. I besides wrote that for Tusk and the full Russian invasion of Poland is simply a better option than losing in elections and giving power.
Here came a fresh broadcast by Dr. Bartosiak, who has described various conjunctions for years. I gotta listen. And I was openly asking the question: what do you gotta give Orban to make a change in politics? There was no response. Now there is fashion for transaction policy so we will see.
There will be more about writer's leaps.
PS: Oh, I see Razio started talking:
]]>https://www.salon24.pl/newsroom/1428174,strong-word-sikorski-from-result...]]>
During the times of alleged Majdan he excited Ukrainians and I wondered honestly what would happen if Soviet, however, would enter Ukraine. Will they defend Majdan's breast or her fart? specified excitement, however, is unethical.
