Elerond

I meant with that his questions come from White House, instead being actually journalistic questions. So when he questioned Zelensky about his attire, that question come from Trump and co, instead being some silly question from random journalist

Zelensky was there to sign it but for some reason he was forced to ensure humiliation ritual anticipatory press meeting where people usually shortly tell what they except from that days discussions. But Trump for some reason made that event much longer than it usually is, take his time to praise Putin, which is quite rude considering that he was meeting president of country that Putin has invaded, then his ally in press score asks why Zelensky disrespects US by not fearing suite and Vance praises Russia's diplomacy, in which Zelensky maybe unwisely comments what kind of diplomacy Vance is speaking, which lead Vance and Trump shouting Zelensky how ungrateful he is. Even after that Zelensky was willing to sign the mineral deal, but Trump kicked him out. So there was no deal to be made, this was show to Trump supporters to put blame on Zelensky for his failure to make peace in Ukraine as soon as he become president which he said he will do during his campaign. So Zelensky had already lost US when Trump was elected, there was nothing that he could really have done but surrendered to please Trump, but even that option would have alienated US. EU already has funded Ukraine more than US (132.3 billion euros vs 114.2 billion euros) has, and even in military aid they are about equal (62 billion euros vs 64 billion euros). EU can double the support easily if they want considering that it is less than 1% of their GDP, it is more about question how difficult is to do because EU has members that support Russia and who are now empowered by USA to block all support for Ukraine.

He was not random reporter but MAGA superstar Marjorie Taylor Greene's boyfriend and MAGA insider. So he was there to do MAGA team's bidding. It was also interesting how also TASS's reporter was allowed in the Oval room, when so many other reporter got denied. But maybe it isn't that surprising when taking in account that Trump gave speech how badly and unfairly US press write about Putin during his first term.

Yeltsin did say that he wants Russia to join NATO. Putin is more complex, but he has taken quite adversary stance towards from start of his rule.

I am not sure that Kravchuk didn't support NATO membership considering that he visited NATO headquarters, lead Ukraine's foreign policy to formalized Ukraine's relationship with NATO and helped to create framework agreement with NATO to support Central and Eastern European countries to join NATO. Kuchma started to propose special partnership with NATO after Russian Federal Council officially endorsed claim that Sevastopol is part of Russia. Which eventually lead him to declare that Ukraine wants to join NATO in 2002, although NATO countries seemed to though that such would be too risky because it would upset Russia, opinion that they still hold. Yushchenko then tried his best to get NATO and EU to open their doors for Ukraine, but his efforts were blocked by opposition parties that called referendum (polls said that about 50% oppose idea of joining NATO) about continuing pursuing joining in NATO, which lead to some leading Ukraine politician to state that Ukraine will not join NATO as long as public opposes it. W. Bush and Obama promised to support Ukraine's membership in NATO, but in 2008 NATO decided that it will not offer membership for Ukraine or Georgia yet. Bit later NATO told that Ukraine and Georgia would need to make reforms as the leaving present by W. Bush. Yanukovych campaigned with idea that Ukraine's relationship with NATO is sufficient and there is no urgency to join. Later he said that Ukraine's relationship with NATO is partnership and Ukraine can't live without that partnership. Then he removed "integration into Euro-Atlantic security and NATO membership" from Ukraine's national security strategy and law that didn't allow Ukraine to join any military bloc but allowed co-operation with them. But in same moth Ukraine approved plan to implement national annual program of cooperation with NATO, which lead Ukraine to continue joint exercises with NATO during Yanukovych presidency. Interim government and then president Poroshenko stated that they don't intent to make Ukraine a member of NATO. In August 2014 after reports that Russian military is operating in Ukraine, Prime minister Yatsenyuk announced he will ask Ukraine parliament to put Ukraine to path towards NATO membership and repeal non-block law. After that Ukraine has made joining NATO one of its priorities, which was answered by President of European Commission that it will take at least 20 years. But NATO did add Ukraine in 2018 in list of aspiring members. Zelenskyy signed Ukraine to NATO's enhanced opportunity partner interoperability program, which does not have effects on decisions about membership according to NATO's official statement. In 2021 when Russia started to bring troops and have military exercises on Ukraine's borders NATO members promised military support and started to grandstand about possibility give Ukraine MAP status in NATO. Then after half year of building troops Russia invaded Ukraine and NATO members didn't gave military support, but at least they gave equipment and money and sanctioned Russia somewhat. Popular support for NATO in Ukraine is about 80%, which is up from polls in 2014-2019, when support was about 50%, but Ukraine is probably not any closer to NATO membership than it has ever been. So in sort none of Ukraine's presidents have been against NATO, but Yushchenko was clearly NATO fan others seem to have seen it as way to protect Ukraine from Russia.

There were no NATO troops (except during annual Rapid Trident exercise which has organized since 2013, when about 6000 troops from NATO and African countries trained with Ukraine's troops for a week) before current invasion and even possibility for NATO troops were close to zero and Ukraine joining NATO was even more unlikely. Invasion itself made idea of NATO troops in Ukraine a possibility that could actually happen. So I don't see that would prevent subsequent ones as blocking NATO troops was not one of the goals that Russia tries to achieve with the invasion. Invasion made it possible that Finland and Sweden joined NATO. Support for NATO in Finland was in 2018 less than 23%, 2021 it was 26%, in 2022 after Russia started their invasion it jumped to over 70%. In January 2022 less than 40% of members of Finnish parliament supported joining NATO, in March support had jumped to over 90%. Finnish Government Defence Report from 2021 estimated that NATO support in Finland could reach 50% in 2040 if Russia continues its power politics and Russian parliament members continue to threated Finland. So if Russia didn't want NATO to expand, they choose option that caused opposite effect, quite predictably Russia warned against NATO deploying troops in Ukraine in 2021 and said that is their red line, but at that time Russia itself was already moving its troops to Ukraine's border for "military exercise" which ended as invasion to Ukraine in 2022. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56616778 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/2/russia-warns-nato-against-troop-deployment-to-ukraine https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/putin-says-nato-troops-in-ukraine-would-be-a-red-line-for-moscow Although Ukraine wanted NATO to hasten its membership because it feared that Russia may invade https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/06/ukraine-pressures-nato-for-membership-as-russia-amasses-troops-at-border Russia was also against NATO countries supplying Ukraine https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/22/russia-accuses-west-of-fuelling-hysteria-over-ukraine-tensions https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/30/russia-will-act-if-nato-countries-cross-ukraine-red-lines-putin-says Although Russia did say that they brough troops to Ukraine borders as response against non specified NATO threats https://www.euronews.com/2021/04/12/g7-calls-on-russia-to-cease-provocations-on-ukraine-border There was also speculation that everything has been just to increase gas prices in Europe and get approval for Nord Stream 2 https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-shmyhal-nato-russia/

EDIT: Sweden can now feel warm embrace of US as ally and trade partner, as US is seeking to block Sweden from selling Gripens to Columbia as they want that Columbia buys F-16 from USA instead. https://www.infodefensa.com/texto-diario/mostrar/5194032/029-colombia-estados-unidos-vetara-venta-componentes-gripen-colombia . Saab clearly made big mistake when they decided to buy jet engines from USA instead of making their own or buying them from France/UK, now US can block all their sales of Gripens.

Not sell Ukraine to Russia? Not blackmail Ukraine? Not put Ukraine greater sanctions than German Empire got after WWI? US already had vested economic interest to Ukraine. Considering that over half of the minerals US wants are in areas controlled by Russia, they would need to send their troops to get they want. They aren't illegally annexed if they became legally part of Russia, then annexation is internationally accepted. Agreement is poor and unjust which will lead destabilization and longer conflict, even if conflict changes its form. Also NATO seems to be breaking over this decision, considering that NATO countries look new forms of alliances because they can't trust that NATO works. This outcome seems to be certain regardless of what else happens. EU countries are looking to increase their nuclear arsenal, they are looking new military alliance that will coordinate European defense, which will take role of main coordinating body from NATO. EU looks if they can get closer trade alliance with China, India and South America, because they can't trust US. Also why Russia would not invade Ukraine again, especially after Ukraine is demilitarized and there will not be any troops that are would prevent Russia from taking the Ukraine when they want? Or do you think that Russia will somehow drop two of their core demands (demilitarization of Ukraine and no NATO troops in Ukraine)?

That seems to be lie, as they don't promise Ukraine anything including ammunition and equipment which have been in hold and there is no preparation to continue to supply them and are still looking to do deal with Russia. Even situation with star link is still under question Also they are they clearly aren't sure if Ukraine will sign the deal in Friday considering how they leaked information that Ukraine already signed it in order to create confusion.

At least merit based hiring is back https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/2/22/2305562/-Which-Candidate-Is-The-DEI-Hire

You don't need enemies, when you allies are more than willing to rob you and if necessary point gun towards you

I have played Starfinder 2nd edition beta, like Pathfinder 2nd edition it works well in campaigns that are lots of tactical battles as in those system works best. Most of the character sheet abilities, spells etc. are meant for battles. Also splitting game in three modes, encounter, exploration and downtime. Most of the game time goes is spent in encounter mode, then exploration and time spent in downtime mode is usually quite little. Most of the encounters are combat encounter, although rules give rules for social encounters, but they aren't as well defined as rules for combat encounters. Combat encounter system uses Paizo's three action system, which means that each character gets three actions for their turn which they can use to do what they want. Things like moving, attack, hiding etc. are just actions character can choose to do or they can use actions given their feats, items, etc.. Some things like many of the spells use two or more actions to do. To avoid that people just attack three times each turn, character gets minus to their next attack action and even more minus to their third and so on attack actions. In my opinion this gives players reason to look some other options that they could do their turn. There is also quite good math behind the minuses and bonuses that characters can get from conditions and items, etc. that in difficult encounter it is usually mandatory to use buffs and debuffs. Exploration is more flexible mode that changes to moving around in dungeon, space ship, etc. to traveling between planets. Usually in this mode game master may give some skill challenges in form of random hazards or finding glues etc, Game master should also use how players behave in this mode to determine how well they are prepared to next combat or social encounter. Downtime mode is meant to just forward time in game world and give player ability buy new equipment, find information about their next mission/s. So bit like breather between more action heavy segments in story. Starfinder has quite interesting lore and as Paizo also supports bringing stuff from Pathfinder it gives big variety of options to pick in terms of character races, occupations, classes etc.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/us-opposes-wording-russian-aggression-in-g7-statement/ar-AA1zs7Ka According to anonymous Western officials, US envoys opposed the phrase "Russian aggression" and similar descriptions that G7 leaders have used since 2022 to describe the conflict. Two anonymous sources added that the Trump administration's insistence on softening the wording reflects a broader shift in US policy toward describing the war as a "conflict in Ukraine." So not war and Russia is not the aggressor https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/ukraine-no-joint-statement-after-zelenskyy-us-envoy-talks/ar-AA1zoYPd Meanwhile, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that Zelenskyy had assured him that Ukraine would sign a $500 billion (€478.5 billion) deal to transfer rights to Ukrainian minerals, but hadn't signed it yet, Bloomberg News reported.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/usda-accidentally-fired-officials-bird-flu-rehire-rcna192716 I would ask double salary to go back, as it is clear that they can't say no

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/eradicating-anti-christian-bias/ Promised to remove anti christian bias which includes task force containing the Secretary of Education and there are multiple proposals to increase Christian religious teaching during school hours https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/12/religious-education-schools-lifewise Pentagon already removed most of the books that have any mention of slavery, racial discrimination etc. in their schools in military bases and some members of administration have said they want do same in public schools. And public libraries and school libraries have already started to ban such books in 2021 in many of the states. https://pen.org/book-bans/2023-banned-book-list/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/13/pentagon-schools-closed-libraries-trump https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/military-schools-order-remove-dei-books-b2699252.html https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity/ https://gizmodo.com/the-list-of-trumps-forbidden-words-that-will-get-your-paper-flagged-at-nsf-2000559661 https://www.americanprogress.org/article/budget-committee-republicans-are-moving-to-take-away-food-and-health-care-from-americans/ Single parent families especially single mother families have high percentage of people that get SNAP benefits and medicare, and new administration is planning to cut those heavily. Cutting DEI programs also hurt single parent families as it in many places means cutting daycare services, flexing work time etc.

Underlined are either done or started

Taking hostages is strategy that is doomed to fail so releasing hostages is would be best option for Hamas, but I don't think that it can prevent war from continuing, but unlike keeping hostages, releasing hostages would increase pressure of other countries to intervene.

Both Hamas military and political wings have presence in West Bank and they actively commit strikes against Israel from West Bank, but they aren't in control in West Bank and their support there is many times lesser than it is in Gaza, but thousands come to celebrate and welcome Hamas soldiers that Israel freed to West Bank in exchange of hostages in Gaza (with caveat that Israel quite freely names Palestinians as members of Hamas when they prison them). Also many Israel's actions in West Bank don't have anything to do with Hamas, but are just Israel taking more land to themselves. But overall hostage taking by Hamas has caused worst tragedy in history of Israel and Palestine and has lead more deaths than all previous conflicts together and current Israeli leadership has welcomed the opportunity with open arms.

First they say Money Laundering and Asset Forfeiture. The Criminal Division's Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section shall prioritize investigations, prosecutions, and asset forfeiture actions that target activities of Cartels and TCOs. Task Force KleptoCapture, the Department's Kleptocracy Team, and the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative, shall be disbanded. Attorneys assigned to those initiatives shall return to their prior posts, and resources currently devoted to those efforts shall be committed to the total elimination of Cartels and TCOs. then they remove resources from investigating main form of money laundering https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/bondis-day-one-corporate-crime-memos-rattle-white-collar-bar I predict that this works as well as war on drugs, US prison industry will be the main benefactory and cartels continue to exist as long as people are willing to pay billions and billions each year for drugs. World Wide drug problem will just get worse as western countries are cutting their foreign aid and trade wars loom and cause economic uncertainty that will hit hardest towards poor. World is full of chemicals that lets people lose their sorrows for minute and more there is misery more there is demand for relief.

Even though things are credited for Trump, truth is that whole republican party supports them and as republicans control both senate and house, majority of state governments, and federal courts are full of republican picked judges, there is wide support for everything that is happening. Republicans just like to hide behind Trump's back.

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/news/2024/12/the-government-of-canadas-border-plan-significant-investments-to-strengthen-border-security-and-our-immigration-system.html Maybe calling head of new task force as fentanyl czar was what US needed more from Canada so that they know that they are serious in their commitment

But nothing was done to it? Mexico and Canada promised to do what they already promised for Biden and US only postponed tariffs start day not redacted them. This theater seem more like distraction from Musk taking over USAID and US treasury and at the end tariffs will put in place because new republicans like them because they think they worked in 1800s

one would think he and his team gets presidential pardon for all crimes they may have committed. And in future all presidents will have their task forces that can do anything regardless what law says and no one can charged because everyone gets blank pardon against all possible crimes they could be accused of committing. In other news tariffs for Canada were canceled as they promised to implement their border plan that they already had decided to do in December, so victory for Trump????

EU car issue is that countries decided to stop subsidizing buying new cars, because it was seen as supporting rich people and when you combine it with increasing energy prices especially in Germany, it create situation where European car makers were producing expensive cars that people didn't have money to buy which was already problem them and then Chinese manufactures started to increase their imports thanks to subsidies that they receive from their government. So EU was in hard place where they had with their actions caused their car manufactures be in bad competitive situation and they can't even give subsidies because they are currently unpopular, so tariffs were only way to ensure that Chinese producers can't take much of market when European manufactures adjust, as most of them already have cheaper electric cars in their pipelines, but for most they are coming out 2026 or 2027. So in EU case tariffs were specific to answer in specific problem. In US case tariffs are general, which effect is harder to predict, but they most likely will not help US that much as their manufactures supply lines rarely are just in US and as Mexico, Canada and China are not just their biggest trading partners but main suppliers for many products that US manufactures use, tariffs will most likely cause need to increase prices of products produced in US also, not only imported products. And as US workforce is expensive and tariffs aren't universal, companies will move their manufacturing facilities in countries that aren't targeted by tariffs. Chinese companies have in past moved their production in countries like Vietnam when Chinese products are targeted with tariffs. And some companies do virtual moves to US, like Mercedes that circled US tariffs by having facility in US where they shipped cars manufactured in Germany in parts and they had single robot line that put them together in US and claimed that they were build in US.

Successful marketing where they blame issues to some population that isn't really blame of those issues, but it is easier to sell than trying to tell that in past we have collected too little pension money, which now causes issues because population does not grow but gets older causing increase of both pension and health service expenses And failure to increase value of goods and services that we export, causing problems when it comes to increasing salaries in such extend that inflation has started to eat people's purchasing power. Failure to act on research about changing climate in past 50 years, which has lead to need to try find fast ways to fix infrastructure and policies that are designed to different kind of climate Failure to understand we can't lean single supplier in important products like fertilizers, gas and oil. Failure to see that tying large parts of economy to few big companies is as dangerous if not even more dangerous than tying it to public sector, because it both makes difficult to refocus economy if there is global issue and people's livelihood is tied to entity which they don't have any say over. Failure to see that we need to invest to future not pump billions and billions to sectors that are dying, even if that would cause short term problems. Failure to understand that short term gains from privatizing public infrastructure will lead to monopolies that will cause issues Failure to ensure bureaucracy of people immigrating to work does not prevent creation of jobs and cause people to go else where. System where seeking asylum is easiest way to get residence but with prohibition to work, will lead situation where migrants are see only as burden. Failure to create rules to prevent tax havens, unchecked imports, equal postal fees, need to have same standards for imported goods than domestically produced goods have, have same refund rules for imported goods than domestic goods, have equal tariffs. Failure to have coherent clear foreign policies that are same for all and lots of other issues.