I understand you don’t like trump and respect this is your prerogative but respectfully you come across as a one eyed crazy footy fan re your views on Trump. ( this should not be too surprising considering this is a footy fan site 😜. It’s really hard to see this as objective in any way. Btw I don’t see Trump as a Nobel prize winner but see him as at least trying to do more than the previous administration both in this conflict and the one in the Ukraine.
I don’t discredit that dependant on one’s perspective, that observation is justified
From your perspective, I have never come to any of your conclusions on Trump. Key topics to date include tariffs, DOGE, ICE, Iran, trans, autism + paracetamol, anti-vax, pro-Russian sentiment, climate change, bombing boats in international waters and Netanyahu alliance / enabling.
My counter argument is that these are all highly divisive topics in nature. That Trump’s stances on all of the above go against the grain w.r.t established ethical norms, economic, medicinal and scientific understanding.
My level of concern on certain topics can border on dramatic. As I’ve repeatedly mentioned, I am skewed in the sense that I have a vested interest in historical precedents such as the rise of the Khmer Rouge (have visited the Cambodian killing fields) and of course Nazi Germany. I see many parallels in the modern state of Israel and MAGAt US.
Repeatedly I have shown to be very sensitive to topics on anti-intellectualism (“don’t trust the experts”) and debates on human rights (racial profiling, detainment, cleansing). Unfortunately every topic of late is centred around these two key issues.
Overall, Trump is not a credible individual; both you and I know he is a compulsive liar.
When involved in peace talks he does not involve the input of key stakeholders and expects everyone to agree on his terms.
In his homeland he takes unprecedented ideologically charged positions without consultation.
__________
As an example, if Trump purely focused on border security - I could appreciate that it is not an objectively bad exercise. I’d argue the issue is more related to mental health and the US healthcare system for reasons X Y Z, but I would at least be able to address basic pros and cons.
However, Trump ignored the courts, did away with due process, reignited racial profiling and established an untouchable, untrained police force (not too dissimilar to the Gestapo) to deport and/or incarcerate people across the country. i.e with a small series of steps he has moved it to an indefensible position.
Stephan Miller’s influence is extremely concerning.
_______________
Back to Gaza, I was talking about Trump enabling Israel
months ago. If you took issue with me acknowledging the idea, but criticising the method then your question must have actually been “what do democrat fans think about trump solving __”.
I have done zero to support the Democrat position on it other than referencing Trump’s actions and suggesting that it would be the lesser of two evils. Like Trump, do I think the Democrats would wait until after it’s classed a genocide to act? I don’t know for a fact. Do you think without the global attention Trump would have suddenly taken such a right turn?
My stance on the peace plan itself is reflected
in this article. Else this post would turn into a novel
I do not apologise for not buying into Trump’s rhetoric, or yesterday’s headlines. When I believe Trump/MAGA takes on an extreme or irrational stance I expand on exactly why. While you have been respectful, if you do disagree with what I say no one is stopping you from pulling apart the content in my posts. If you are so inclined, you may tear any bullet point to shreds
