| Trump v Zelensky 19:22 - Feb 28 with 15794 views | Drewster |
Absolutely bizarre scenes in the Oval Office today, staggering.
Trump and his VP clearly had a plan to ambush him, but to do it so publicly was bad form.
|  | | |  |
| Trump v Zelensky on 22:14 - Mar 1 with 2143 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
| Trump v Zelensky on 22:09 - Mar 1 by connell10 |
Oh here she is , you only turn up for threads like this , you never post anything on football. Your a troll love! As for my grammar go f uck yaself . How you like them apples? If Clive wants to ban me then that's up to him. [Post edited 2 Mar 0:07]
|
"What Trump and Vance did was loathsome , especially I think to the British public who on the whole despise bullies!"
You literally typed the above a few hours ago. People in glass houses eh? |  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 22:15 - Mar 1 with 2142 views | connell10 |
Troll |  |
| AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!! | | Poll: | best number 10 ever? |
| |
| Trump v Zelensky on 22:33 - Mar 1 with 2035 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
Classy as always. I've missed our chats connell.
Back to the debate though - I'll just add this. Ukraine and its people deserve a dignified peace. Not surrender, not Putin gets whatever he wants. But another 100,000 dead people isn't going to move that line on a map. So Zelensky, or whoever replaces him, needs to negotiate what they can and end the fighting. | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 00:36 - Mar 2 with 1777 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Trump v Zelensky on 22:00 - Mar 1 by Orthodox_Hoop |
Ah, I see the name calling has already begun, accompanied with quite shocking grammar.
A quote from the admin of this forum, Mr NorthernR, from a while ago:
"And I'll offer a little bit of 'advice' of my own at this point.
After some initial really interesting discussion from across the spectrum, both threads have now descended down through the bit where everybody who holds the opposite view is either Hitler or a Communist, into some really quite nasty, personal stuff.
It's exactly why I used to just delete these threads and say go elsewhere for that. I've relaxed it this summer on trust, and initially it's produced some really interesting stuff which I've enjoyed reading, but I'm not having the direction both these threads are going now.
...
Everybody here is a QPR fan. We support the same club, we sit in the same stadium, we drink in the same pubs. We think differently about a whole range of issues, and that's okay - people are entitled to hold different views.
The rhetoric gets dialed down now.
We treat each other with respect whether we agree or not.
We remember we're all QPR here together.
Otherwise I'm going to start deleting and locking threads, banning accounts, and if I end up here by myself, well after 20 years I don't give a toss."
Stay classy connell. |
Wonderful words, except, like most places in life, some people on LfW are more equal than others. |  |
| |
| Trump v Zelensky on 03:40 - Mar 2 with 1661 views | strikerace |
I really shouldn't add to this thread but I am drinking. Let me just say that Americans don't understand the subtleties of UK politics, and the UK doesn't understand the subtleties of American politics. Trump won basically because Biden (or whoever was running the country now that the US knows he has pretty much out of it) was weak on illegal immigration, weak on crime, pushed around on international policy, hurt the US on inflation, and overly extreme on social issues (on the liberal side).
Pushing back on the international deals deemed unfair, and just taking advantage of the US, is what he views he was elected to do. He ran on ending the Israel/Hamas war and ending the Russia/Ukraine war. So when viewed from the majority that elected him he is doing what he promised.
I tried hard to not "promote" a side in what I wrote and keep it neutral. By the way, there are books now being released on how Biden's incapacity was hidden from the public by the political staff and media, and who was calling the shots behind the scene. I point this out to show I am not speculating and opinion. |  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 08:51 - Mar 2 with 1383 views | numptydumpty |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:04 - Mar 1 by BucksRanger |
Not really Connell, I just get fed up with all the swearing on this site and I marked you down for it. I'm an adherent of a lot more free speech than many on here so I wouldn't stop you swearing but I don't like it. |
My good friend and I were always massively tickled by the fact that way back in the 80s, there were signs up in the ground to not take part in chanting that contained swear words otherwise you risked being ejected from the ground.
Found it hilarious and unbelievably weird as 99% on a bad day would have been on their way home early as a consequence.
Sorry chap, swearing just a part of every day life and when we miss a wide open goal, oh fiddlesticks, just doesn't have the same impact !!!!
Only swear word i just really don't like is the C word and not that football club from near by but the four lettered one !!!
Bloke near me, used to shout this every other word with a toddler on his lap. That to me isn't right, in anyways.
You are not going to get your wish on here though. Football is a very emotional business full of extremes !!! [Post edited 2 Mar 8:58]
|  |
| |
| Trump v Zelensky on 09:03 - Mar 2 with 1364 views | garybevan1 |
I'm struggling to understand what Zelensky has done.
His country was invaded by Russia and he's getting shite from Russia's biggest enemy.
It's all about money with Trump.
Totally unacceptable. | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 10:21 - Mar 2 with 1201 views | hubble |
| Trump v Zelensky on 09:03 - Mar 2 by garybevan1 |
I'm struggling to understand what Zelensky has done.
His country was invaded by Russia and he's getting shite from Russia's biggest enemy.
It's all about money with Trump.
Totally unacceptable. |
I don't want to single you out for a LOL, but really, come on.
It is forgivable that you may have missed the Pandora Papers investigation into criminal offshore bank accounts (a media-wide investigation by a consortium of investigative journalists that included the Guardian newspaper), but I think in the light of this thread and the geopolitical quagmire that it refers to, people need to know that one of the revelations was that Zelensky and his associates had millions of dollars stashed away in offshore bank accounts before the Ukraine/Russia conflict kicked off. Given that he was elected in part to oppose criminal oligarchs in his own country, this could be considered hypocritical at the very least.
From the Guardian report:
"The files reveal Zelenskiy participated in a sprawling network of offshore companies, co-owned with his longtime friends and TV business partners. They include Serhiy Shefir, who produced Zelensky’s hit shows, and Shefir’s older brother, Borys, who wrote the scripts. Another member of the consortium is Ivan Bakanov, a childhood friend. Bakanov was general director of Zelenskiy’s production studio, Kvartal 95."
Nearly all of these associates were given prominent positions in his new government.
The article also reveals that Zelensky had extensive business dealings with Russia.
Please read the full article here: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-oligarch-ukrainian-pr
What I find extremely ironic is that people in this thread accusing Trump of being corrupt have somehow missed this rather damning evidence of Zelensky's corruption.
There are so many other angles to this situation (that no one has referenced in this thread) that I am loath to go into them all here, because I would have to write something like a thesis to explain the web of dodgy dealings that involve Zelensky and US/Western vested interests, including banking cartels, weapons manufacturers and not least Biden and his son Hunter, who was of course handed retrospective immunity from prosecution by his father just before Biden left office.
On one level you have the straightforward narrative that this is just a war of aggression, plain and simple, and in that story it is a simple fact of Putin bad, Zelensky good. But surely anyone who has followed geopolitics this century knows that wars are about much more than these simple tropes. Look at the second Iraq war, for example: an illegal war knowingly entered into by the UK and US based on falsified documents that not only destroyed that country and killed 100s of 1000s of innocent people, but more pertinently to the issue of corruption, lined the pockets to the tune of multi-multi millions of US corporations and individuals - not least of course Halliburton, who strangely had one Dick Cheney as its CEO before he went on to become the American Vice President before and during the Iraq war.
Countless millions of dollars went missing during this conflict, enriching many with vested interests, but also, of course, the terrorist organisation known as ISIS, giving them a huge fund to go on to wage their own campaigns in the Middle East.
I am citing this as evidence that wars are huge opportunities for businesses and individuals to amass fortunes; this is not only heinous in every sense, but also deeply corrupt. The Russia/Ukraine war is no exception. It has been a money-laundering goldmine, as well as a more straightforward profit-generating exercise. And I think it's worth asking: where do people think the 100s of billions of dollars that have been pumped into the Ukraine have gone? Have any of you read the detailed accounting? Well, of course not, because there isn't any available.
As others have pointed out, Trump was elected to (amongst other things), stop the almost endless flow of US tax-payers money from disappearing into the bottomless pit of this conflict. We're talking about 100 Billion dollars (according to Zelensky) up to 300 Billion dollars (according to Trump). And of course Europe, including this country, have also pumped billions into this conflict: we're all paying for this.
At the same time, I think it is pertinent to point out that Trump has not suddenly become averse to war, it is a position he has held steadfastly for years. It is again ironic that it is a hard-left media outlet - Media Lens - who have revealed how consistently anti-war Trump has been. They are extremely unflattering in their view of him, but they are at least scrupulously honest in their assessment of him in regard to military action. Here's a snippet:
"Thus, on the West’s ‘regime change’ efforts in Syria, Trump tweeted bluntly in 2013:
‘We should stay the hell out of Syria, the “rebels” are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS? ZERO’
In the same year, he also said:
‘Remember, all these “freedom fighters” in Syria want to fly planes into our buildings.’
In July 2017, the Washington Post reported:
‘President Trump has decided to end the CIA’s covert program to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels battling the government of Bashar al-Assad…’
In December 2018, Trump announced that he would withdraw all of the two thousand US troops deployed in Syria. The US war on Syria was later revived under president Biden, and Syrian president Assad was overthrown last December.
In 2020, during Trump’s first presidency, the US and the Taliban signed an ‘agreement for bringing peace’ to Afghanistan after nearly two decades of conflict, eliciting widespread criticism. Trump had earlier explained his rationale:
‘Well, I’m the one that talks about these wars that are 19 years (long), and people are just there. And don’t kid yourself, you do have a military-industrial complex. They do like war.
‘I said, I want to bring our troops back home – the place went crazy. They want to keep… you have people here in Washington, they never want to leave. I said, you know what I’ll do, I’ll leave a couple hundred soldiers behind, but if it was up to them, they’d bring thousands of soldiers in.
‘Someday people will explain it, but you do have a group, and they call it the military-industrial complex.
‘They never want to leave; they always want to fight. No. I don’t want to fight, but you do have situations like Iran. You can’t let them have nuclear weapons. You just can’t let that happen.’
Full article: https://www.medialens.org/2025/orange-peace-is-donald-trump-a-racist-misogynisti
Industrial scale money-laundering and corruption are inextricably bound into this conflict and Zelensky is at the heart of it, whether people like that fact or not. So even with a modicum of impartiality, it's fair to say that Trump comes out of this well. Yes, I know this will absolutely enrage many of you, but it's a plain fact that no one has done more than Trump to attempt to end this conflict that has already killed 100s of 1000s of people. Yet I see people in this thread calling for a perpetuation of this war. To me, that is a hideously bloodthirsty attitude, and of course it represents the position of most of Europe. Surely, peace is of paramount importance?
I could go on, but if you've read this far, well done. I'm sure many will disagree with my analysis, but there is a whole lot more that I could add to illuminate this heinous, murky, horrible situation. But I do want to say that I am NOT saying that Putin is a good guy; he's just another one of the mafia thugs involved. But I do want to take issue with the reductive, simplistic and IMO flawed anti-Trump rhetoric. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trump v Zelensky on 10:52 - Mar 2 with 1116 views | ted_hendrix |
It's strange to me that the leaders of Countries can sit In front of TV cameras and talk shyte but cant sit around a negotiating table and talk peace or as a minimum agree a ceasefire, of course nothing Is that easy/straight forward.
Ukraine need and ask for more military supplies, Russia have been using North Korean bullets and foot soldiers with the deaths of inexperienced North Korean soldiers Increasing daily.
Always the poor squaddie who never gets back home to his village, parents/Families. |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:18 - Mar 2 with 1054 views | stowmarketrange |
| Trump v Zelensky on 10:21 - Mar 2 by hubble |
I don't want to single you out for a LOL, but really, come on.
It is forgivable that you may have missed the Pandora Papers investigation into criminal offshore bank accounts (a media-wide investigation by a consortium of investigative journalists that included the Guardian newspaper), but I think in the light of this thread and the geopolitical quagmire that it refers to, people need to know that one of the revelations was that Zelensky and his associates had millions of dollars stashed away in offshore bank accounts before the Ukraine/Russia conflict kicked off. Given that he was elected in part to oppose criminal oligarchs in his own country, this could be considered hypocritical at the very least.
From the Guardian report:
"The files reveal Zelenskiy participated in a sprawling network of offshore companies, co-owned with his longtime friends and TV business partners. They include Serhiy Shefir, who produced Zelensky’s hit shows, and Shefir’s older brother, Borys, who wrote the scripts. Another member of the consortium is Ivan Bakanov, a childhood friend. Bakanov was general director of Zelenskiy’s production studio, Kvartal 95."
Nearly all of these associates were given prominent positions in his new government.
The article also reveals that Zelensky had extensive business dealings with Russia.
Please read the full article here: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-oligarch-ukrainian-pr
What I find extremely ironic is that people in this thread accusing Trump of being corrupt have somehow missed this rather damning evidence of Zelensky's corruption.
There are so many other angles to this situation (that no one has referenced in this thread) that I am loath to go into them all here, because I would have to write something like a thesis to explain the web of dodgy dealings that involve Zelensky and US/Western vested interests, including banking cartels, weapons manufacturers and not least Biden and his son Hunter, who was of course handed retrospective immunity from prosecution by his father just before Biden left office.
On one level you have the straightforward narrative that this is just a war of aggression, plain and simple, and in that story it is a simple fact of Putin bad, Zelensky good. But surely anyone who has followed geopolitics this century knows that wars are about much more than these simple tropes. Look at the second Iraq war, for example: an illegal war knowingly entered into by the UK and US based on falsified documents that not only destroyed that country and killed 100s of 1000s of innocent people, but more pertinently to the issue of corruption, lined the pockets to the tune of multi-multi millions of US corporations and individuals - not least of course Halliburton, who strangely had one Dick Cheney as its CEO before he went on to become the American Vice President before and during the Iraq war.
Countless millions of dollars went missing during this conflict, enriching many with vested interests, but also, of course, the terrorist organisation known as ISIS, giving them a huge fund to go on to wage their own campaigns in the Middle East.
I am citing this as evidence that wars are huge opportunities for businesses and individuals to amass fortunes; this is not only heinous in every sense, but also deeply corrupt. The Russia/Ukraine war is no exception. It has been a money-laundering goldmine, as well as a more straightforward profit-generating exercise. And I think it's worth asking: where do people think the 100s of billions of dollars that have been pumped into the Ukraine have gone? Have any of you read the detailed accounting? Well, of course not, because there isn't any available.
As others have pointed out, Trump was elected to (amongst other things), stop the almost endless flow of US tax-payers money from disappearing into the bottomless pit of this conflict. We're talking about 100 Billion dollars (according to Zelensky) up to 300 Billion dollars (according to Trump). And of course Europe, including this country, have also pumped billions into this conflict: we're all paying for this.
At the same time, I think it is pertinent to point out that Trump has not suddenly become averse to war, it is a position he has held steadfastly for years. It is again ironic that it is a hard-left media outlet - Media Lens - who have revealed how consistently anti-war Trump has been. They are extremely unflattering in their view of him, but they are at least scrupulously honest in their assessment of him in regard to military action. Here's a snippet:
"Thus, on the West’s ‘regime change’ efforts in Syria, Trump tweeted bluntly in 2013:
‘We should stay the hell out of Syria, the “rebels” are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS? ZERO’
In the same year, he also said:
‘Remember, all these “freedom fighters” in Syria want to fly planes into our buildings.’
In July 2017, the Washington Post reported:
‘President Trump has decided to end the CIA’s covert program to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels battling the government of Bashar al-Assad…’
In December 2018, Trump announced that he would withdraw all of the two thousand US troops deployed in Syria. The US war on Syria was later revived under president Biden, and Syrian president Assad was overthrown last December.
In 2020, during Trump’s first presidency, the US and the Taliban signed an ‘agreement for bringing peace’ to Afghanistan after nearly two decades of conflict, eliciting widespread criticism. Trump had earlier explained his rationale:
‘Well, I’m the one that talks about these wars that are 19 years (long), and people are just there. And don’t kid yourself, you do have a military-industrial complex. They do like war.
‘I said, I want to bring our troops back home – the place went crazy. They want to keep… you have people here in Washington, they never want to leave. I said, you know what I’ll do, I’ll leave a couple hundred soldiers behind, but if it was up to them, they’d bring thousands of soldiers in.
‘Someday people will explain it, but you do have a group, and they call it the military-industrial complex.
‘They never want to leave; they always want to fight. No. I don’t want to fight, but you do have situations like Iran. You can’t let them have nuclear weapons. You just can’t let that happen.’
Full article: https://www.medialens.org/2025/orange-peace-is-donald-trump-a-racist-misogynisti
Industrial scale money-laundering and corruption are inextricably bound into this conflict and Zelensky is at the heart of it, whether people like that fact or not. So even with a modicum of impartiality, it's fair to say that Trump comes out of this well. Yes, I know this will absolutely enrage many of you, but it's a plain fact that no one has done more than Trump to attempt to end this conflict that has already killed 100s of 1000s of people. Yet I see people in this thread calling for a perpetuation of this war. To me, that is a hideously bloodthirsty attitude, and of course it represents the position of most of Europe. Surely, peace is of paramount importance?
I could go on, but if you've read this far, well done. I'm sure many will disagree with my analysis, but there is a whole lot more that I could add to illuminate this heinous, murky, horrible situation. But I do want to say that I am NOT saying that Putin is a good guy; he's just another one of the mafia thugs involved. But I do want to take issue with the reductive, simplistic and IMO flawed anti-Trump rhetoric. |
War disrupts opportunities for business,and that’s why Trump want the war to end.He couldn’t give a sh@t if the whole of Ukraine was swallowed up by Putin’s Russia,as long as there’s a chance for him to make money out of it.
How could any country be expected to accept peace terms that lose 20% of their country?And would Trump accept peace at any price if 20% of the US was taken by a foreign invasion?
His world ideas mean that the strong survive and the weak are trampled underfoot in the race to make a profit.
The sooner he’s gone the better. |  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:24 - Mar 2 with 1031 views | ChrisNW6 |
| Trump v Zelensky on 10:21 - Mar 2 by hubble |
I don't want to single you out for a LOL, but really, come on.
It is forgivable that you may have missed the Pandora Papers investigation into criminal offshore bank accounts (a media-wide investigation by a consortium of investigative journalists that included the Guardian newspaper), but I think in the light of this thread and the geopolitical quagmire that it refers to, people need to know that one of the revelations was that Zelensky and his associates had millions of dollars stashed away in offshore bank accounts before the Ukraine/Russia conflict kicked off. Given that he was elected in part to oppose criminal oligarchs in his own country, this could be considered hypocritical at the very least.
From the Guardian report:
"The files reveal Zelenskiy participated in a sprawling network of offshore companies, co-owned with his longtime friends and TV business partners. They include Serhiy Shefir, who produced Zelensky’s hit shows, and Shefir’s older brother, Borys, who wrote the scripts. Another member of the consortium is Ivan Bakanov, a childhood friend. Bakanov was general director of Zelenskiy’s production studio, Kvartal 95."
Nearly all of these associates were given prominent positions in his new government.
The article also reveals that Zelensky had extensive business dealings with Russia.
Please read the full article here: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-oligarch-ukrainian-pr
What I find extremely ironic is that people in this thread accusing Trump of being corrupt have somehow missed this rather damning evidence of Zelensky's corruption.
There are so many other angles to this situation (that no one has referenced in this thread) that I am loath to go into them all here, because I would have to write something like a thesis to explain the web of dodgy dealings that involve Zelensky and US/Western vested interests, including banking cartels, weapons manufacturers and not least Biden and his son Hunter, who was of course handed retrospective immunity from prosecution by his father just before Biden left office.
On one level you have the straightforward narrative that this is just a war of aggression, plain and simple, and in that story it is a simple fact of Putin bad, Zelensky good. But surely anyone who has followed geopolitics this century knows that wars are about much more than these simple tropes. Look at the second Iraq war, for example: an illegal war knowingly entered into by the UK and US based on falsified documents that not only destroyed that country and killed 100s of 1000s of innocent people, but more pertinently to the issue of corruption, lined the pockets to the tune of multi-multi millions of US corporations and individuals - not least of course Halliburton, who strangely had one Dick Cheney as its CEO before he went on to become the American Vice President before and during the Iraq war.
Countless millions of dollars went missing during this conflict, enriching many with vested interests, but also, of course, the terrorist organisation known as ISIS, giving them a huge fund to go on to wage their own campaigns in the Middle East.
I am citing this as evidence that wars are huge opportunities for businesses and individuals to amass fortunes; this is not only heinous in every sense, but also deeply corrupt. The Russia/Ukraine war is no exception. It has been a money-laundering goldmine, as well as a more straightforward profit-generating exercise. And I think it's worth asking: where do people think the 100s of billions of dollars that have been pumped into the Ukraine have gone? Have any of you read the detailed accounting? Well, of course not, because there isn't any available.
As others have pointed out, Trump was elected to (amongst other things), stop the almost endless flow of US tax-payers money from disappearing into the bottomless pit of this conflict. We're talking about 100 Billion dollars (according to Zelensky) up to 300 Billion dollars (according to Trump). And of course Europe, including this country, have also pumped billions into this conflict: we're all paying for this.
At the same time, I think it is pertinent to point out that Trump has not suddenly become averse to war, it is a position he has held steadfastly for years. It is again ironic that it is a hard-left media outlet - Media Lens - who have revealed how consistently anti-war Trump has been. They are extremely unflattering in their view of him, but they are at least scrupulously honest in their assessment of him in regard to military action. Here's a snippet:
"Thus, on the West’s ‘regime change’ efforts in Syria, Trump tweeted bluntly in 2013:
‘We should stay the hell out of Syria, the “rebels” are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS? ZERO’
In the same year, he also said:
‘Remember, all these “freedom fighters” in Syria want to fly planes into our buildings.’
In July 2017, the Washington Post reported:
‘President Trump has decided to end the CIA’s covert program to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels battling the government of Bashar al-Assad…’
In December 2018, Trump announced that he would withdraw all of the two thousand US troops deployed in Syria. The US war on Syria was later revived under president Biden, and Syrian president Assad was overthrown last December.
In 2020, during Trump’s first presidency, the US and the Taliban signed an ‘agreement for bringing peace’ to Afghanistan after nearly two decades of conflict, eliciting widespread criticism. Trump had earlier explained his rationale:
‘Well, I’m the one that talks about these wars that are 19 years (long), and people are just there. And don’t kid yourself, you do have a military-industrial complex. They do like war.
‘I said, I want to bring our troops back home – the place went crazy. They want to keep… you have people here in Washington, they never want to leave. I said, you know what I’ll do, I’ll leave a couple hundred soldiers behind, but if it was up to them, they’d bring thousands of soldiers in.
‘Someday people will explain it, but you do have a group, and they call it the military-industrial complex.
‘They never want to leave; they always want to fight. No. I don’t want to fight, but you do have situations like Iran. You can’t let them have nuclear weapons. You just can’t let that happen.’
Full article: https://www.medialens.org/2025/orange-peace-is-donald-trump-a-racist-misogynisti
Industrial scale money-laundering and corruption are inextricably bound into this conflict and Zelensky is at the heart of it, whether people like that fact or not. So even with a modicum of impartiality, it's fair to say that Trump comes out of this well. Yes, I know this will absolutely enrage many of you, but it's a plain fact that no one has done more than Trump to attempt to end this conflict that has already killed 100s of 1000s of people. Yet I see people in this thread calling for a perpetuation of this war. To me, that is a hideously bloodthirsty attitude, and of course it represents the position of most of Europe. Surely, peace is of paramount importance?
I could go on, but if you've read this far, well done. I'm sure many will disagree with my analysis, but there is a whole lot more that I could add to illuminate this heinous, murky, horrible situation. But I do want to say that I am NOT saying that Putin is a good guy; he's just another one of the mafia thugs involved. But I do want to take issue with the reductive, simplistic and IMO flawed anti-Trump rhetoric. |
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-oligarch-ukrainian-pr
Thanks an interesting read. Not sure it really points to anything other than, multi millionaire media personalities utilising off shore tax havens to protect wealth. Zelensky was already extremely wealthy and successful prior to becoming the president. Ultimately it's for the Ukrainian people to decide if they trust and believe the man leading the fight against corruption and Russian aggression. | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:27 - Mar 2 with 1023 views | derbyhoop |
Fundamentally, neither Ukraine, VZ nor W European leaders trust Putin. Trump/Vincent don't or don't want to understand those concerns. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:37 - Mar 2 with 975 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:18 - Mar 2 by stowmarketrange |
War disrupts opportunities for business,and that’s why Trump want the war to end.He couldn’t give a sh@t if the whole of Ukraine was swallowed up by Putin’s Russia,as long as there’s a chance for him to make money out of it.
How could any country be expected to accept peace terms that lose 20% of their country?And would Trump accept peace at any price if 20% of the US was taken by a foreign invasion?
His world ideas mean that the strong survive and the weak are trampled underfoot in the race to make a profit.
The sooner he’s gone the better. |
POTUS Trump is approx. 40 days into his second term of being democratically elected by the American people, which means you've got over 1400 days left.
Or by "the sooner he's gone the better" are you suggesting something else? | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:40 - Mar 2 with 963 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:27 - Mar 2 by derbyhoop |
Fundamentally, neither Ukraine, VZ nor W European leaders trust Putin. Trump/Vincent don't or don't want to understand those concerns. |
No one in their right mind should trust Putin. Ever. Same way as no one should trust anything a politician ever says, including our PM. Anyone who thinks Trump/Vance "trust" Putin is suffering from an extreme case of TDS - behind closed doors you can guarantee the discussion is much different to what they say in front of the cameras.
Do you think Churchill and FDR trusted Stalin? Yet they sat down with him more than once and came to an agreement of how to defeat Hitlr, despite Stalin invading Poland at the start of the war. [Post edited 2 Mar 11:43]
| | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:41 - Mar 2 with 956 views | swisscottage |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:27 - Mar 2 by derbyhoop |
Fundamentally, neither Ukraine, VZ nor W European leaders trust Putin. Trump/Vincent don't or don't want to understand those concerns. |
I thin ka lot of people haven't' watched the whole press conference, but have only watched from the point things went downhill.
Unfortunately Zelensky put his foot in it, creating the opportunity for Vance to go full attack dog. At the point Vance first mentioned mentioned the need for diplomacy in a fairly neutral manner, Zelensky had to make the point 'what sort of diplomacy' and then sat back, arms crossed in completely defensive posture.
Zelensky didn't need to do that. He wasn't going to win points in that situation. 10-1 on his advisors and diplomats had told him not to try and argue anything, and he had to go and do it.
From that point on you then saw the worst of Trump and Vance.
It was totally avoidable and about the biggest faux pas I've seen with his country's survival on the line. [Post edited 2 Mar 11:41]
| | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:56 - Mar 2 with 884 views | BklynRanger |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:37 - Mar 2 by Orthodox_Hoop |
POTUS Trump is approx. 40 days into his second term of being democratically elected by the American people, which means you've got over 1400 days left.
Or by "the sooner he's gone the better" are you suggesting something else? |
Honestly that is a pathetic attempt to escalate things. |  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:02 - Mar 2 with 858 views | stowmarketrange |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:37 - Mar 2 by Orthodox_Hoop |
POTUS Trump is approx. 40 days into his second term of being democratically elected by the American people, which means you've got over 1400 days left.
Or by "the sooner he's gone the better" are you suggesting something else? |
The 1400 days will have to do as I’m not suggesting anything else,but if the chaos he’s caused in only 40 days is anything to go by,god help the world for the next 1400.
Let’s hope that he isn’t related to St Swithin because it only rained for 1 day for him. | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:26 - Mar 2 with 754 views | QPR_Nippon |
| Trump v Zelensky on 10:21 - Mar 2 by hubble |
I don't want to single you out for a LOL, but really, come on.
It is forgivable that you may have missed the Pandora Papers investigation into criminal offshore bank accounts (a media-wide investigation by a consortium of investigative journalists that included the Guardian newspaper), but I think in the light of this thread and the geopolitical quagmire that it refers to, people need to know that one of the revelations was that Zelensky and his associates had millions of dollars stashed away in offshore bank accounts before the Ukraine/Russia conflict kicked off. Given that he was elected in part to oppose criminal oligarchs in his own country, this could be considered hypocritical at the very least.
From the Guardian report:
"The files reveal Zelenskiy participated in a sprawling network of offshore companies, co-owned with his longtime friends and TV business partners. They include Serhiy Shefir, who produced Zelensky’s hit shows, and Shefir’s older brother, Borys, who wrote the scripts. Another member of the consortium is Ivan Bakanov, a childhood friend. Bakanov was general director of Zelenskiy’s production studio, Kvartal 95."
Nearly all of these associates were given prominent positions in his new government.
The article also reveals that Zelensky had extensive business dealings with Russia.
Please read the full article here: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-oligarch-ukrainian-pr
What I find extremely ironic is that people in this thread accusing Trump of being corrupt have somehow missed this rather damning evidence of Zelensky's corruption.
There are so many other angles to this situation (that no one has referenced in this thread) that I am loath to go into them all here, because I would have to write something like a thesis to explain the web of dodgy dealings that involve Zelensky and US/Western vested interests, including banking cartels, weapons manufacturers and not least Biden and his son Hunter, who was of course handed retrospective immunity from prosecution by his father just before Biden left office.
On one level you have the straightforward narrative that this is just a war of aggression, plain and simple, and in that story it is a simple fact of Putin bad, Zelensky good. But surely anyone who has followed geopolitics this century knows that wars are about much more than these simple tropes. Look at the second Iraq war, for example: an illegal war knowingly entered into by the UK and US based on falsified documents that not only destroyed that country and killed 100s of 1000s of innocent people, but more pertinently to the issue of corruption, lined the pockets to the tune of multi-multi millions of US corporations and individuals - not least of course Halliburton, who strangely had one Dick Cheney as its CEO before he went on to become the American Vice President before and during the Iraq war.
Countless millions of dollars went missing during this conflict, enriching many with vested interests, but also, of course, the terrorist organisation known as ISIS, giving them a huge fund to go on to wage their own campaigns in the Middle East.
I am citing this as evidence that wars are huge opportunities for businesses and individuals to amass fortunes; this is not only heinous in every sense, but also deeply corrupt. The Russia/Ukraine war is no exception. It has been a money-laundering goldmine, as well as a more straightforward profit-generating exercise. And I think it's worth asking: where do people think the 100s of billions of dollars that have been pumped into the Ukraine have gone? Have any of you read the detailed accounting? Well, of course not, because there isn't any available.
As others have pointed out, Trump was elected to (amongst other things), stop the almost endless flow of US tax-payers money from disappearing into the bottomless pit of this conflict. We're talking about 100 Billion dollars (according to Zelensky) up to 300 Billion dollars (according to Trump). And of course Europe, including this country, have also pumped billions into this conflict: we're all paying for this.
At the same time, I think it is pertinent to point out that Trump has not suddenly become averse to war, it is a position he has held steadfastly for years. It is again ironic that it is a hard-left media outlet - Media Lens - who have revealed how consistently anti-war Trump has been. They are extremely unflattering in their view of him, but they are at least scrupulously honest in their assessment of him in regard to military action. Here's a snippet:
"Thus, on the West’s ‘regime change’ efforts in Syria, Trump tweeted bluntly in 2013:
‘We should stay the hell out of Syria, the “rebels” are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS? ZERO’
In the same year, he also said:
‘Remember, all these “freedom fighters” in Syria want to fly planes into our buildings.’
In July 2017, the Washington Post reported:
‘President Trump has decided to end the CIA’s covert program to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels battling the government of Bashar al-Assad…’
In December 2018, Trump announced that he would withdraw all of the two thousand US troops deployed in Syria. The US war on Syria was later revived under president Biden, and Syrian president Assad was overthrown last December.
In 2020, during Trump’s first presidency, the US and the Taliban signed an ‘agreement for bringing peace’ to Afghanistan after nearly two decades of conflict, eliciting widespread criticism. Trump had earlier explained his rationale:
‘Well, I’m the one that talks about these wars that are 19 years (long), and people are just there. And don’t kid yourself, you do have a military-industrial complex. They do like war.
‘I said, I want to bring our troops back home – the place went crazy. They want to keep… you have people here in Washington, they never want to leave. I said, you know what I’ll do, I’ll leave a couple hundred soldiers behind, but if it was up to them, they’d bring thousands of soldiers in.
‘Someday people will explain it, but you do have a group, and they call it the military-industrial complex.
‘They never want to leave; they always want to fight. No. I don’t want to fight, but you do have situations like Iran. You can’t let them have nuclear weapons. You just can’t let that happen.’
Full article: https://www.medialens.org/2025/orange-peace-is-donald-trump-a-racist-misogynisti
Industrial scale money-laundering and corruption are inextricably bound into this conflict and Zelensky is at the heart of it, whether people like that fact or not. So even with a modicum of impartiality, it's fair to say that Trump comes out of this well. Yes, I know this will absolutely enrage many of you, but it's a plain fact that no one has done more than Trump to attempt to end this conflict that has already killed 100s of 1000s of people. Yet I see people in this thread calling for a perpetuation of this war. To me, that is a hideously bloodthirsty attitude, and of course it represents the position of most of Europe. Surely, peace is of paramount importance?
I could go on, but if you've read this far, well done. I'm sure many will disagree with my analysis, but there is a whole lot more that I could add to illuminate this heinous, murky, horrible situation. But I do want to say that I am NOT saying that Putin is a good guy; he's just another one of the mafia thugs involved. But I do want to take issue with the reductive, simplistic and IMO flawed anti-Trump rhetoric. |
Interesting that you say you dislike analysis which is ‘reductive, simplistic and flawed’, because what you provide in your post is pretty much a textbook example IMO!
It’s undeniably true that Ukraine, just like other post-Soviet fledgling democracies, continues to have big problems with corruption. But it has to be seen in the context of significant reforms since the 2014 Maidan Revolution – including by Zelensky’s administration – that have at the very least moved the country from an ‘extremely’ corrupt country to a ‘moderately’ corrupt one.
As one expert put it: “As Ukraine’s war against Russia proceeds, policymakers and the public should expect further corruption scandals. These must be addressed, and their perpetrators punished, but they must also be seen in the proper context. Occasional lurid headlines notwithstanding, Ukraine has made major progress in tackling grand corruption, reducing the power of oligarchs, and managing a vast increase in defense spending without scandals on a massive scale. That in itself is testament to how much has changed in Ukraine since a decade ago.” Link: https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/03/06/ukraine-corruption-reforms-russia-war/
Moreover, you massively overstate the case for corruption against Zelensky. I agree that owning offshore companies raises questions about transparency, especially for an anti-corruption candidate, but in and of itself it is not illegal. You might argue that transferring shares before the presidency began constituted an effort to hide assets, but it is also common for business owners in Ukraine to protect assets from political instability. There is no proof that these offshore accounts were used for illegal activities like money laundering or bribery, or that Zelensky benefited financially from these accounts while in office. I agree it might make him look a bit hypocritical when presenting himself as the anti-corruption candidate, but his alleged transgressions pale into insignificance compared to what we are seeing with Trump using the presidency to enrich himself and his family members. Link: https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/president-
And that’s before we even talk about the criminal conviction for fraud, and how he tried to overturn the results of a democratic election.
The case you make for Trump being pro-peace (interesting that you use a 'hard-left' website to make the case, when sections of the hard-left have been parroting Kremlin talking points for years) is a very kind reading of his administration’s avowed America First strategy, which has nothing to do with a genuine desire for global peace (beyond bagging himself a Nobel Peace Prize) and everything to do with aggressive pursuit of American (and personal) financial self-interest. If he was really pro-peace he would be pushing for a two-state solution in Palestine rather than advocating ethnic cleansing in Gaza; he would be focusing on securing a lasting peace in Ukraine that recognised its status as a sovereign democratic nation rather than a future Russian colony/puppet state. And he certainly would have ruled out, when asked, the possibility of military action in potentially turning Greenland/Panama Canal into a US territory.
The outrage on this thread was a natural response to what everybody could see was clearly happening in front of their eyes – a sickening display of bullying by the ‘strong’ against the ‘weak’ which had the express intent of humiliating Zelensky in front of the world’s media - in the process handing another huge political win for Putin. [Post edited 2 Mar 12:36]
|  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:34 - Mar 2 with 707 views | baz_qpr |
Always worth reminding that Ukraine had nuclear weapons and gave them up in the 90s on the basis of a security guarentees deal to protect her signed by the US and the West. Which they have failed to honour.
Putin does not believe Ukraine has the right to exist, or Moldova or a number of other eastern European countries. |  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:35 - Mar 2 with 704 views | essextaxiboy |
| Trump v Zelensky on 11:56 - Mar 2 by BklynRanger |
Honestly that is a pathetic attempt to escalate things. |
Once we find out what Putin has on Trump, hopefully impeachment will follow . |  | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:50 - Mar 2 with 662 views | baz_qpr |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:35 - Mar 2 by essextaxiboy |
Once we find out what Putin has on Trump, hopefully impeachment will follow . |
At least two ex-KGB have said old "Krasnov" was targeted and recruited in the 80's. I think the truth is he is easily bought as are many others and not just by the Russians. Aint going to be any impeachment, and I doubt there will be any mid-terms either | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 13:35 - Mar 2 with 444 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:02 - Mar 2 by stowmarketrange |
The 1400 days will have to do as I’m not suggesting anything else,but if the chaos he’s caused in only 40 days is anything to go by,god help the world for the next 1400.
Let’s hope that he isn’t related to St Swithin because it only rained for 1 day for him. |
Fair play. Here's hoping the Democrats get their house in order over the next 4 years and drop some of the nonsense that lost them this election so the American electorate gets a decent choice between the two parties for their next President. I'd argue the chaos that you refer to was caused as reaction to the previous four years of unparalleled weakness and poor leadership shown by America's then President and Vice-President. | | | |
| Trump v Zelensky on 13:36 - Mar 2 with 441 views | hubble |
| Trump v Zelensky on 12:26 - Mar 2 by QPR_Nippon |
Interesting that you say you dislike analysis which is ‘reductive, simplistic and flawed’, because what you provide in your post is pretty much a textbook example IMO!
It’s undeniably true that Ukraine, just like other post-Soviet fledgling democracies, continues to have big problems with corruption. But it has to be seen in the context of significant reforms since the 2014 Maidan Revolution – including by Zelensky’s administration – that have at the very least moved the country from an ‘extremely’ corrupt country to a ‘moderately’ corrupt one.
As one expert put it: “As Ukraine’s war against Russia proceeds, policymakers and the public should expect further corruption scandals. These must be addressed, and their perpetrators punished, but they must also be seen in the proper context. Occasional lurid headlines notwithstanding, Ukraine has made major progress in tackling grand corruption, reducing the power of oligarchs, and managing a vast increase in defense spending without scandals on a massive scale. That in itself is testament to how much has changed in Ukraine since a decade ago.” Link: https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/03/06/ukraine-corruption-reforms-russia-war/
Moreover, you massively overstate the case for corruption against Zelensky. I agree that owning offshore companies raises questions about transparency, especially for an anti-corruption candidate, but in and of itself it is not illegal. You might argue that transferring shares before the presidency began constituted an effort to hide assets, but it is also common for business owners in Ukraine to protect assets from political instability. There is no proof that these offshore accounts were used for illegal activities like money laundering or bribery, or that Zelensky benefited financially from these accounts while in office. I agree it might make him look a bit hypocritical when presenting himself as the anti-corruption candidate, but his alleged transgressions pale into insignificance compared to what we are seeing with Trump using the presidency to enrich himself and his family members. Link: https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/president-
And that’s before we even talk about the criminal conviction for fraud, and how he tried to overturn the results of a democratic election.
The case you make for Trump being pro-peace (interesting that you use a 'hard-left' website to make the case, when sections of the hard-left have been parroting Kremlin talking points for years) is a very kind reading of his administration’s avowed America First strategy, which has nothing to do with a genuine desire for global peace (beyond bagging himself a Nobel Peace Prize) and everything to do with aggressive pursuit of American (and personal) financial self-interest. If he was really pro-peace he would be pushing for a two-state solution in Palestine rather than advocating ethnic cleansing in Gaza; he would be focusing on securing a lasting peace in Ukraine that recognised its status as a sovereign democratic nation rather than a future Russian colony/puppet state. And he certainly would have ruled out, when asked, the possibility of military action in potentially turning Greenland/Panama Canal into a US territory.
The outrage on this thread was a natural response to what everybody could see was clearly happening in front of their eyes – a sickening display of bullying by the ‘strong’ against the ‘weak’ which had the express intent of humiliating Zelensky in front of the world’s media - in the process handing another huge political win for Putin. [Post edited 2 Mar 12:36]
|
Thanks for at least presenting a well thought out response, but I could absolutely level the same accusation that you make against me, back to you.
For example, you have ignored everything I've said about Joe and Hunter Biden in relation to Ukraine, and your assessment of Zelensky's corruption avoids a pretty damning case for the prosecution (the Pandora Papers was an investigation into criminal activity), which of course includes cronyism on a grand scale. And then there is the case of what's happened to the 100s of billions of dollars that has been pumped into Ukraine. So to state that I "massively overstate the case for corruption against Zelensky." is in itself (ironically), hyperbole.
As I said in my post, there's a lot more that I could say, but I think in the context of this being a football forum and in the interests of (relative) brevity, I have tried to present a condensed analysis based on some key observations.
I would also say that your argument is very one-sided: you've ignored Biden's role, and by omission (like so many others in this thread) made it appear it is only Trump who's been self-aggrandising (which goes without saying), but context is key here. The corruption and self-aggrandising that went on under Biden's watch was off the scale.
I will admit that even with the years of research I've done into geopolitics it's very hard to untangle what is a very complex web, but, in reference to this particular issue, here's a quick snapshot from the United States House Committee on Oversight and Reform report into Biden's activities:
"the Committee on Oversight and Accountability has accelerated its investigation of the Biden family’s domestic and international business practices to determine whether the Biden family has been targeted by foreign actors, President Biden is compromised, and our national security is threatened. Records obtained through the Committee’s subpoenas to date reveal that the Bidens and their associates have received over $20 million in payments from foreign entities.
4) Ukraine: Devon Archer joined the Burisma board of directors in spring of 2014 and was joined by Hunter Biden shortly thereafter. Hunter Biden joined the company as counsel, but after a meeting with Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky in Lake Como, Italy, was elevated to the board of directors in the spring of 2014. Both Biden and Archer were each paid $1 million per year for their positions on the board of directors. In December 2015, after a Burisma board of directors meeting, Zlochevsky and Hunter Biden “called D.C.” in the wake of mounting pressures the company was facing. Zlochevsky was later charged with bribing Ukrainian officials with $6 million in an attempt to delay or drop the investigation into his company. The total amount from Ukraine to the Biden family and their associates is $6.5 million."
Full article: https://oversight.house.gov/the-bidens-influence-peddling-timeline/
And that, as they say, is the tip of the iceberg.
Similarly, you talk about Trump's "criminal conviction for fraud, and how he tried to overturn the results of a democratic election", where the second part of that is contentious (as recent revelations have proved), and the first part ignores the context of far more heinous criminal activity in terms of his opponents, not least Hillary Clinton in funding the Steele dossier against Trump - something people in this thread still cite (unconsciously, I think) as if it were true, when it was completely fabricated. Indeed, the mainstream media were gung-ho for it when it was released as evidence of Trump being in Putin's pocket, but when it was exposed as a fraud, funded by Hillary Clinton, there was no retraction, in fact many continued to cite it as if it were true. Yet despite being a criminal attempt to smear her rival, all Clinton received for her crime was a fine:
"Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee have agreed to pay $113,000 to settle a Federal Election Commission investigation into whether they violated campaign finance law by misreporting spending on research that eventually became the infamous Steele dossier." https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-2022-midterm-elections-business-electi
Regarding the Media Lens article I quoted from, did you actually read it? The fact that they absolutely hate Trump, yet still concede that he has consistently pursued an anti-war policy (long before his presidency) and, furthermore, has called out the corruption of the US military/industrial complex and their endless pursuit of war for profit is very telling.
Look, we're clearly never going to agree, but I hope you will at least concede that the issues in this highly polarised debate deserve to be reconsidered without the highly charged emotion that characterises many of the posts here.
The bottom line for me is that peace must be reached as soon as possible. There are no winners in this conflict. Even if Putin does get to keep the majority Russian-populated areas of Ukraine that they have invaded, the price for that has been hideous: 800,000 Russians have already died in this conflict according to my sources. I agree that in an ideal world (one that sadly doesn't exist) then Putin would stop the war immediately, withdraw his troops and submit to a peace treaty. And I agree that Trump should be pushing far harder for that to happen. But in my analysis, Trump's negotiating stance is to play both sides up against the wall in order to get the fastest resolution. It's not nice, but that's realpolitik. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
