Thousands show up again on Saturday to protest Trump in Ohio
Protesters dressed as characters in “The Handmaid’s Tale,“ a dystopian novel about life under a tota...
Thousands show up again on Saturday to protest Trump in Ohio
Archive Links: ais

seen from Russia

seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from Afghanistan

seen from Australia

seen from Russia
seen from Russia
seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Canada

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from China
seen from Philippines

seen from Malaysia
seen from Taiwan

seen from Germany
seen from China
seen from Jordan
seen from Germany
Thousands show up again on Saturday to protest Trump in Ohio
Protesters dressed as characters in “The Handmaid’s Tale,“ a dystopian novel about life under a tota...
Thousands show up again on Saturday to protest Trump in Ohio
Archive Links: ais

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
That's extremely dangerous.
When it comes to foreign policy, there is no such thing as “the Trump administration.” There is only President Donald Trump, jabbering random wishes or pronouncements at campaign rallies or on Twitter, and his array of advisers scrambling to make sense of the maelstrom.
Hence the spectacle on Oct. 7 when national security adviser Robert O’Brien told an audience in Las Vegas that U.S. troops in Afghanistan would be cut to 2,500 by the beginning of next year—followed, just hours later, by Trump tweeting that all the troops should be home by Christmas—followed four days later by Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, telling NPR that he hadn’t endorsed either decision and that the military was still operating on the assumption that troops would be cut to 4,500.
Legitimate arguments could be made for any one of those options. The thing is, the U.S. government should decide on one before its various leaders blurt out all three in public.
While everyone’s focused on Ukraine, Trump is selling out to Turkey.
Trump accepts Turkish political violence in the United States. On May 16, 2017, Trump welcomed Erdogan to the White House. Afterward, as Erdogan watched from a car outside the Turkish ambassador’s residence, his bodyguards broke through an American police cordon and assaulted protesters. Video showed Erdogan conferring with his head of security just before the attack. Congress and the State Department denounced it, and a grand jury indicted 15 Turkish officers. But Trump said nothing. In private, he consoled Erdogan over the indictments, which were later dropped.
As Turkey murders our Kurdish allies with Trump’s approval, do not forget that Edrogan’s thugs attacked and beat AMERICAN CITIZENS IN AMERICA and got away with it. Oh, and then Trump sided with Erdogan and his thugs against Americans.
Trump belongs in prison for multiple crimes.
His foreign policy was disruptive—but also largely ineffective.
The Trump administration abandoned our allies. Now they’re abandoning us.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Bowen: For all his bluster, Trump has no better option than talks with Iran
Why Diplomacy Beats Drama in the US-Iran Standoff
Let's talk about the elephant in the geopolitical room. In a sharp analysis from BBC's Jeremy Bowen, his bluster-versus-reality framing cuts right to the heart of the current US-Iran tension. For all the tough talk, the takeaway is simple: Trump has no better option than sitting down at the negotiating table. If you've been doom-scrolling through headlines wondering whether things are about to boil over, this one's for you.
Bowen — the BBC's International Editor (the BBC is Britain's publicly-funded national broadcaster, roughly analogous to PBS but far larger) — argues that the maximalist posture doesn't actually leave many exits. Sometimes the loudest voice in the room is the one with the fewest cards to play.
The Bluster-Trump Paradox
Here's the thing about the bluster: Trump projects strength,. But strength without follow-through is just noise. Bowen points out that military options carry enormous risk, unpredictable escalation,, and and no guaranteed off-rampWhen you strip away the theater, the math points back to diplomacy. It's the classic startup lesson — sometimes the boldest move is the disciplined one, not the flashy one.
Why Trump Has No Better Option
Why is "trump better" than the alternatives actually a myth here? Because the region is a tinderbox, and iran's proxies, oil supply concerns,And allied fatigue all stack the deck against unilateral action. Bowen's read is that a deal — even an imperfect one — beats an open-ended conflict nobody can control. Think of it as choosing a manageable technical debt over a catastrophic system failure.
What This Means for the Rest of Us
Energy prices, market stability,. And global supply chains all hinge on how this plays out. If you're building products or shipping software, geopolitical shocks ripple straight into your infrastructure cost. {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"FAQPage","mainEntity":[{"@type":"Question","name":"Why Diplomacy Beats Drama in the US-Iran Standoff","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Let's talk about the elephant in the geopolitical room. In a sharp analysis from BBC's Jeremy Bowen, his bluster-versus-reality framing cuts right to the heart of the current US-Iran tension. For all the tough talk, the takeaway is simple: Trump has no better option than sitting down at the negotiating table. If you've been doom-scrolling through headlines wondering whether things are about to boil over, this one's for you. Bowen — the BBC's International Editor (the BBC is Britain's publicly-funded national broadcaster, roughly analogous to PBS but far larger) — argues that the maximalist posture doesn't actually leave many exits. Sometimes the loudest voice in the room is the one with the fewest cards to play."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"The Bluster-Trump Paradox","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Here's the thing about the bluster: Trump projects strength,. But strength without follow-through is just noise. Bowen points out that military options carry enormous risk, unpredictable escalation,, and and no guaranteed off-rampWhen you strip away the theater, the math points back to diplomacy. It's the classic startup lesson — sometimes the boldest move is the disciplined one, not the flashy one."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Why Trump Has No Better Option","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Why is \"trump better\" than the alternatives actually a myth here? Because the region is a tinderbox, and iran's proxies, oil supply concerns,And allied fatigue all stack the deck against unilateral action. Bowen's read is that a deal — even an imperfect one — beats an open-ended conflict nobody can control. Think of it as choosing a manageable technical debt over a catastrophic system failure."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"What This Means for the Rest of Us","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Energy prices, market stability,. And global supply chains all hinge on how this plays out. If you're building products or shipping software, geopolitical shocks ripple straight into your infrastructure cost."}}]}
📖 Read more: Bowen: For all his bluster, Trump has no better option...
Bowen For All His Bluster Trump Has No Better Option Than... | US Tech Trends & News | Latest Technology News
Sponsored by Buddy Vibe Coding — Vibe Coding IDE — AI-powered desktop editor
US Senate again refuses to limit Trump’s war in Iran
U.S. Senate Republicans and one Democrat blocked another War Powers Resolution Wednesday night to stop President Donald Trump from further military action in Iran without authorization from Con...
US Senate again refuses to limit Trump’s war in Iran
Author Comment This essay explores a structural question in strategy: why major wars tend to emerge during periods of institutional strain rather than political stability. If crisis periods weaken legitimacy and intensify internal division, external conflict can become more than a geopolitical contest. It becomes a test of whether the political system itself can sustain strategy. Strategists from Carl von Clausewitz onward have emphasized that war is inseparable from the political structure of the state that wages it. When institutions face internal stress, the relationship between government, military power, and the cohesion of the people becomes especially important. Looking at the current conflict involving Iran through this lens raises an important strategic question. Do crisis wars tend to restore political legitimacy within a republic—or do they accelerate the erosion of it? I welcome thoughtful perspectives from readers and fellow strategists.
View On WordPress