BruceVC

Current Iranian leadership has a history of antagonism towards the US since its revolution, its been going on for decades They have been killing US soldiers in various ME regions directly like in Iraq 2003 where Quds special forces got involved in that war or through Iranian proxies long before Trump ever thought he would become a politician And then they dislike the US even more because of its support of Israel and thats because of the historical tension between Iran and Israel where the US is often referred to as the "Great Satan " and Iran doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist Trump is not the reason for the tension between the US and Iran, it goes back much longer than that and is influenced by several other reasons

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/08/politics/doj-charges-three-iranian-plot-to-kill-donald-trump/index.html An update on the Iranian plot to assassinate Trump and yet some still ask the question " in what way is Iran an enemy to the US "

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine NATO has become more relevant since the end of the Cold War and its membership has grown You cant really judge NATO on " would Article 5 be invoked " because it hasnt been tested? But we can judge NATO on developments like its funding models because that shows necessary commitment from its members and this was always lacking until Russia's warmongering became undeniable after the invasion https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2024/07/nato-defence-spending-a-bumper-year/#:~:text=Overall%2C total NATO spending increased,growth of 9% in 2023. " NATO defence expenditure has surged in 2024, with 19 of the 32 Alliance members implementing double-digit growth in real terms to their military budgets. Increases by European members continue to be driven by the threat posed by Russia’s war in Ukraine, in addition to the ambition set in the Wales Summit Declaration in 2014 to spend at least 2% of gross domestic product on defence within a decade. Progress towards the 2% benchmark has been notable, particularly since 2022. According to the latest military-expenditure data released by NATO, 23 members will reach or exceed the 2% of GDP target this year, compared to seven in 2022 and just three in 2014. The data also finds that aggregate spending for the Alliance now exceeds the target level as a proportion of total GDP. The level of growth implemented by countries to reach the target level in 2024 was significant. Overall, total NATO spending increased by 11% in 2024, compared to 3% in 2023. Growth was even stronger among NATO’s European members, who increased their combined military spending by 19% in real terms in 2024, following not-insignificant growth of 9% in 2023. This is remarkable given that the annual average for 2014–22 was just 3%, and is a stark indication of the deterioration in the strategic environment in Europe. This growth spurt, however, will likely skew underlying trends and, as ever, raises concerns that when funding increases too rapidly, it may not be spent effectively. " Out of all the 3 N lies to justify the invasion of Ukraine the one that has become the biggest Russian failure is the NATO one NATO has not only grown its membership and is more on the Russian border than ever before but its own internal funding and relevance has increased NATO was never ever going to invade Russia anyway, nukes prevent that and you wont get consensus for this type of military campaign Article 5 is a big part of countries joining NATO nowadays ironically because of the Russian invasion but hopefully that is never tested

Well I question what it really means to " declare war on Cartels " and how effective that will be considering historical precedent But this is classic Trump grandstanding Its different to things he can implement and be measured on like China tariffs and greater border security

Why is that? What is the main issue you have with an online gaming connection to play any game?

Great story Melkie, I really enjoyed it The eternal and industrious entrepreneurial gamer spirit never dies !!!!

I dont think its that unexpected , ask most countries who were part of the USSR who they want to align with and the majority of them will want to join the EU\West as opposed to the Russian block And Putin knows this which is why he cant ever give people the choice in a free and fair way. He can only ensure Russian alignment by invading countries or supporting a pro-Russian autocracy But he cant risk giving citizens a choice

I watched this movie last night, its really good and it raises the expected moral conundrum you see in the trailer in much more detail and context Its one those movies where you really think " what would I do " considering the reality Let me know when you have or anyone else has watched it and this is what I would have done

This is a good policy but I doubt how effective it will be? You cant win the war on drugs when there is a market for those drugs, that has been confirmed time after time But he can strengthen the border more and focus on Fentanyl And several things around what he is suggesting has already been tried like "Order the Department of Defense to make appropriate use of special forces, cyber warfare, and other covert and overt actions to inflict maximum damage on cartel leadership, infrastructure, and operations"

But we have had 4 years of Trump already and he didnt destroy the US It will be interesting to list the things he did in those 4 years and ask which policies he implemented were really bad because its several years later and its easier to assess? IMO he definitely said some questionable things and he didnt handle the virus as well as he could of but despite all this he still won the popular vote now so for me his presidency wasnt that terrible for Americans?

You make some good points here Can I make an suggestion, you must try to not take what Trump says literally on certain points. Its the path to real and unnecessary anxiety Yes he will deport people illegally in the country and he will strengthen the border but mass deportations is not uncommon. South Africa is doing the exact same thing with people in the country illegally https://witness.co.za/news/2024/10/23/r52-million-spent-deporting-nearly-20-000-illegal-foreigners/ It is a strategy to address illegal migrants, I just dont know how effective it is in our case because we have porous borders and very inefficient border control so anyone deported back to Zimbabwe or Mozambique will literally be back in the country 2 days later We have a much worse problem relative to the USA around illegal migration because the ANC only started doing something about it and acknowledging it 2-3 years ago. And they only started then because of the pushback and resource shortages from black people in townships and illegal migration just exacerbates our limited public sector resources But I have listened to several interviews from Trump spokespeople and they said the military would only be used to deal with border issues and mass deportations and not citizens or anyone in the country legally The point Im making is Trump said a lot of things before the election but like last time what is he really going to implement and what will be the focus? And Im sure the border and migration will gets lots of attention

Its worth playing, the War Room has some nice mechanics and there is always something to do I enjoyed the party interaction but I didnt Romance anyone. I tried with Josephine but she is a NPC and it didnt work out anyway despite how I followed the Romance dialogue options

Well yes, this makes sense on most levels I have raised this before several times. The biggest problem I have with the way Bioware represents women in there latest games is its actually insulting to suggest most female gamers dont want to play a female character who looks like a women or is attractive Its only in gaming where suddenly an attractive women is seen as " objectifying " women But in all other aspects of society you find liberated and attractive women who thrive and are appreciated and that includes news anchors, movies, celebrities, advertising, adult movies, modelling and fashion shows and a myriad of other examples But for several Western development studios the idea of an attractive women is somehow bad Chainmail bikini armour forever !!!!!

Biden would have been a much worse candidate, he was not mentally capable of ever being the US president for another 4 years Trump won for the obvious reasons, the real and perceived failures on issues that most Americans attribute to the Dems because its the incumbent party Thats just the way the politics and elections work in any Democracy where you have free and fair elections and sometimes the incumbent party gets blamed unfairly and sometimes its legitimate In this election the inflation issue was not primarily the Dems fault because the whole world went through inflation after the virus lockdowns ended and this takes time to stabilize But the illegal migration and border failures falls on the Dems and thats unavoidable even if solution is not easy to fix, I am interested to see what Trump will do and how much impact it will make And then one thing that is clear is that the Dems fearmongering strategy against Trump is ineffective and unconvincing. Most Americans just dont believe the whole " how can anyone vote for Trump, he will destroy America " Because the counter argument to that is " things seemed better under Trump, Im not convinced he will destroy the US "

If Trump had been killed he would have become a martyr and the GOP possibly gaining more support from the " Deep State " crowd And that wouldnt have changed the core issues that Americans voted on? And imagine Vance as president, thats worse than Trump IMO

But I dont think it should ever be an effective strategy to use race or gender as a reason to vote for someone That doesn't resonate with most people anymore, the policies and current issues in any Democracy is what really matters to voters. There are lots of examples of excellent female PM\presidents or leaders throughout the world so its not like there arent examples of this Part of the Dems strategy or the perception of Harris success was " she is a black female " and that alone would be enough Thats how it was covered in our media by many commentators

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/11/06/black-latino-voters-boost-donald-trump-election-victory/76084362007/ Here is some interesting data , Hispanic support for Trump helped him achieve his massive gains and win " A realignment among Latino voters – and a smaller shift among Black voters in key swing states− helped catapult Donald Trump to his election victory over Kamala Harris as the Republican nominee expanded his support by peeling off voters from two core Democratic constituencies." " Although Trump didn’t win a majority of either group, he won support from about 13% of Black voters nationally and 45% of Latino voters, according to CNN exit polls. In the 2020 election, Trump won just 8% of Black voters and 32% of Latinos."

But do you not think the EU needs to its own well resourced and funded military that is effective and independent of the US in most areas where reasonable? And Germany would be a part of that as the strongest economy?

I can guarantee you we wont hear anyone say "this election was stolen "

That will be interesting if true because then the question will be " why didnt the same number of people vote " if this election was as important compared to other elections?

Yes but just to be clear, the list they have on you is that the voters role? What I want to understand is where do they get that information from that they check the security questions. Im trying to compare it to South African elections to be clear on the differences in how you vote

And you dont have to produce any type of ID verification to confirm those things? So they assume what you tell them is true based on the voters role information?

What do you mean by that? People arrived to vote and the voting outcomes were determined by the choices they made If Harris had won the same swing states that Biden won in 2020 then the Dems would have won this 2024 election?

Lets assume Trump has won because its more than likely Democracy is the winner either way. For me the most important reality of any Democracy is can you see leadership change through the ballot box and US elections demonstrate this time and time again This is not the same as the implementation or success of policies because thats a mixed bag Imagine living in Russia, China or any other autocracy where you dont have free and fair elections and you stuck with the same leadership for years or decades This election like all US election has been decided on voting issues and more importantly what voting issues matter the most to voters because there were at least 5-6 key issues but they dont all have the same significance to US voters And the 2 issues that IMO mattered the most was the border\illegal migration and the economy: inflation The latter is not really the Dems fault because we went through global inflation influenced primarily by the Corona lockdowns and how that ended. But you can definitely blame the Dems for the former. Its hard to make a convincing argument that Dems have done well on the border\illegal migration But the point Im making is most US voters vote on the issues that directly impact and concern them and the incumbent party will take the knock for this I dont think Americans are stupid to vote like this, I would argue its the expected voting outcome in most Democracies The interesting part now will be how effective Trump will be in addressing these core issues, border\illegal migration and the economy: inflation And that remains to be seem

Why are you so concerned with me asking specific questions? Is it a big problem for you If people dont want to respond they dont have to, its not a big deal. No need to get butthurt