|
Politikk, religion og samfunn President Donald J. Trump - Quo vadis? (Del 2)
- Trådstarter Høvdingen
- Startdato
Diskusjonstråd Se tråd i gallerivisning
-
Men aldri så galt at det ikke er godt for noe..
nå møtes de rike i de rike landene
for å erstatte FN
og prøve på å få fred
det ligner vel litt på noe vi har lest om tidligere tider
da blir Norges bidrag til bistand, fred og krig å sånn, så lite og ubetydelig
at vi kan legge ned den delen av statsbudsjettet og bruke pengene internt i Norge
slik at det effektivt demmes opp for de angstfylte innvandrerhaterne
og vi kan bygge opp vårt eget mer robuste forsvar
i påvente av alarm alarm alarm
Dette tror jeg er en alvorlig feilslutning.
Hvis Trump (ikke USA) vil angripe Grønland så vil det bare bli satt i gang. Mordene på mannskapene i båter utenfor Venezuela ble ikke lagt foran kongressen før de skjedde, ei heller angrepet på Venezuela selv.
Det samme vil skje hvis han vil angripe Grønland; det første vi vil se og høre er at en flåtestyrke dukker opp utenfor øya og dernest at styrker er i ferd med å bli ilandsatt og spesialstyrker har tatt kontroll over Nuuk.
Kongressen vil trolig høre om det på samme tid som oss og vil bare kunne protestere after the fact. Hvis et vedtak fattes om å avslutte operasjonen og trekke seg ut vil dette bli anket av DOJ og det vil ta måneder og år før en avklaring foreligger. En avklaring som kan ignoreres av administrasjonen.
En annen sak er at det nå er helt på det rene at det amerikanske militæret vil utføre enhver ordre som kommer fra Trump, helt uavhengig av og helt uten hensyn til hvorvidt ordren er lovlig eller ei.Carneys tale i Davos.
The rules based order is over.
Nå må man innlede innsats mot amerikansk hegemoni.
- Ble medlem
- 19.09.2014
- Innlegg
- 23.509
- Antall liker
- 16.400
Dent som umiddelbart er mest sannsynelig kommer "to the rescue" er nok verdens finansmarkeder.
Ja, men marknaden heldt då berre helvete med alle?
- Ble medlem
- 27.03.2007
- Innlegg
- 21.691
- Antall liker
- 34.100
- Sted
- Nede i fjæresteinene
- Torget vurderinger
- 2
Både Kina og Japan har allerede solgt seg kraftig ned i amerikanske statsobligasjoner. I mellomtiden er Europa blitt den største holderen av slike obligasjoner, så trusselen om nedsalg er høst reell.Det er for øvrig en diskusjon om effekten av slike handlinger. Gjøres det, koordinert, av mange kan det like godt slå til andre veien også. Dvs at effekten også treffer avsenderne med samme ødeleggende effekt som hos mottakeren.Dansk pensjonsfond vil dumpe amerikansk statsgjeld: – Ikke bærekraftig
Truslene om å overta Grønland løftes frem som en av argumentene for å selge seg ut.www.dn.no
Det spekuleres i at det er hovedgrunnen til at Kina ikke har gått den veien
Kan starte en ny fase i verdensøkonomien
Stemningen i Davos dirrer av uro. I morgen kommer Donald Trump til alpebyen.
www.nrk.no
Allerede nå spekuleres det om ikke kjøpsviljen på amerikanske statsobligasjoner er så lav at Fed må ty til prokuratortiks for å få solgt dem, og grensen for hvor mye amerikanerne ian/må betale i renter allerede faretruende nærmer seg en grense.
MvhSist redigert:
- Ble medlem
- 19.09.2014
- Innlegg
- 23.509
- Antall liker
- 16.400
Ja, men det var markedet som fikk Trump til å feige ut med den opprinnelige tariffgalskapen. Markedet kan gjøre to ting. Ene er å sende aksjekursene i dass, utover hans egen spesielle fiksjon på dette som et barometer på egen brilijans er slikt ikke spesielt populært der borte der det er langt mer utbredt at private eier aksjer enn i Europa. Det andre er å sende rentene på lang amerikansk statsgjeld til himmels. Det vil gjøre temmelig vondt.
Jeg sier ikke at det skjer eller at de vil baile ut da, men slik ståa er nå er det fort det mest sannsynelige / realisitiske som kan gå galningene til å revurdere.
Det har vært litt snakk om at europere (og andre) skal dumpe. For det første er det generelt ikke europeiske stater som eier pr se (Norge et unntak i så måte gjennom Oljefondet). Dessuten må man ha noen å selge til og ikke minst noe annet å kjøpe istedenfor. Det er ikke spesielt lett å se hvem/hva noen av delene skulle være. USA har med god margin verdens største og dypeste markeder.
Han gnåler videre om denne jævla fredsprisen nå i kveld, Norge står ikke høyt på lista hans. Han burde visstnok fått èn pris for hver krig han stoppet, altså 8...
Irriterende nok er Piers Morgan inne på noe, til en forandring.
- Ble medlem
- 29.10.2016
- Innlegg
- 11.066
- Antall liker
- 29.774
- Sted
- Hjortshøj, Danmark.
- Torget vurderinger
- 2
Ikke helt ulikt Russland??
Kanskje de bare skal begjynne å "printe penger" = uthule verdien av dollar??
I øvrigt (uten å være sikker) tror jeg den største keeper av USA´s statgjeld er Kina.
Venter nok på rette tidspunktet til å kreve hele driten innfridd.
- Ble medlem
- 27.03.2007
- Innlegg
- 21.691
- Antall liker
- 34.100
- Sted
- Nede i fjæresteinene
- Torget vurderinger
- 2
Kina har solgt store mengder amerikanske statsobligasjoner og kjøpt gull i stedet.
MvhCarneys oppsummering. Verden er ikke lenger slik vi trodde:
The Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, fresh from a trip to Beijing to forge a new Canada-China partnership, told Davos the world’s “middle powers” need to work together to build a better world order.
“It seems that every day we are reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry. That the rules-based order is fading,” Carney said in a speech that ended with a standing ovation.
Carney said the world faces “the end of a pleasant fiction and the dawn of a harsh reality of geopolitics” in which the great powers are unconstrained. “We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy”, he said.Nokon kjem til å kome.
- Ble medlem
- 26.02.2013
- Innlegg
- 5.177
- Antall liker
- 5.295
WP har denne på framsiden.
Her er Trump pressekonf. Han får et spørsmål om Starmer og Macron, går deretter over til Norge og får enda et spørsmål som fyrer ham opp. Nevner at Norge bruker Nordsjøen -- a tremendous resource that Great Britain should use more. Vi kan vel regne med at Trump syns delelinjen ligger feil. Deretter angriper han Norge pga Nobelprisen.
Trump speaks at White House press briefing — 1/20/2026
President Donald Trump speaks at a press briefing with reporters on Tuesday.For access to live and exclusive video from CNBC subscribe to CNBC PRO: https://c...www.youtube.com
- Ble medlem
- 27.04.2019
- Innlegg
- 12.572
- Antall liker
- 31.526
- Sted
- Nordvest på Jæren
- Torget vurderinger
- 8
Fra avisa Nordland i kveld:
Støre i Bodø i kveld og til Davos i morgen.
Jeg er litt usikker på hvor mange klubbkamper Gahr Støre har fått med seg, men jeg håper at han i disse tider trekker følgende lærdom av det som skjedde i Bodø 20. januar 2026:
Selv om du møter noen som er mye sterkere enn deg og som kanskje er mye rikere enn deg, så legger du deg ikke flat – du hevder din rett til respekt.
Hør, hør. Respekt vinnes gjennom handling, ikke (tomme) ord.
Gratulerer med en fantastisk kamp!
Carrotella lar seg lure av alle disse rikingene.Canadian PM Carney:
It seems that every day we're reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry, that the rules based order is fading, that the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.
And this aphorism of Thucydides is presented as inevitable, as the natural logic of international relations reasserting itself.
And faced with this logic, there is a strong tendency for countries to go along to get along, to accommodate, to avoid trouble, to hope that compliance will buy safety.
Well, it won't.
So, what are our options?
In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel, later president, wrote an essay called The Power of the Powerless, and in it, he asked a simple question: how did the communist system sustain itself?
And his answer began with a greengrocer.
Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: ‘Workers of the world unite’. He doesn't believe it, no-one does, but he places a sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persist – not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Havel called this “living within a lie”.
The system's power comes not from its truth, but from everyone's willingness to perform as if it were true, and its fragility comes from the same source. When even one person stops performing, when the greengrocer removes his sign, the illusion begins to crack. Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down.
- Ble medlem
- 28.09.2016
- Innlegg
- 13.291
- Antall liker
- 15.144
Støre om Trump: – Han vet akkurat hvordan fredsprisen blir tildelt
Statsminister Jonas Gahr Støre slår tilbake mot Trumps påstander om at norske myndigheter kontrollerer hvem som får fredsprisen.
www.nrk.no
Her tar nok Støre fundamentalt feil; han tenker at Trump har en nogenlunde oppegående hjerne med tilnærmet normal respons, mens realiteten er at Trump er jo akkurat som sine tanketomme følgere. "Alle politikere juger", så dermed anser han at Støre = Trump, og hele Nobel-prisen er kun et politisk verktøy i hendene på den norske stat.
The resistance has begun
641 k visninger · 10 k reaksjoner | Law enforcement leaders from across the Twin Cities spoke out about ICE operations in the area. | Fox 9
Law enforcement leaders from across the Twin Cities spoke out about ICE operations in the area.fb.watch
Ja, en ting er jo å få det forklart, gjentatte ganger, men i Trumps hode burde Jonas bare tatt en telefon til Nobelkomiteens leder og gitt instrukser om hvem som
Støre om Trump: – Han vet akkurat hvordan fredsprisen blir tildelt
Statsminister Jonas Gahr Støre slår tilbake mot Trumps påstander om at norske myndigheter kontrollerer hvem som får fredsprisen.
www.nrk.no
Her tar nok Støre fundamentalt feil; han tenker at Trump har en nogenlunde oppegående hjerne med tilnærmet normal respons, mens realiteten er at Trump er jo akkurat som sine tanketomme følgere. "Alle politikere juger", så dermed anser han at Støre = Trump, og hele Nobel-prisen er kun et politisk verktøy i hendene på den norske stat.
skulle tildeles prisen. Det er jo det han selv ville gjort.
Dersom noen i komiteen skulle motsette seg Støres ordre er det bare å skifte dem ut med noen som er blindt lojale.
Som det er i Trumps verden.
er enig, men alle politikere juger og spesielt Støre
Støre om Trump: – Han vet akkurat hvordan fredsprisen blir tildelt
Statsminister Jonas Gahr Støre slår tilbake mot Trumps påstander om at norske myndigheter kontrollerer hvem som får fredsprisen.
www.nrk.no
Her tar nok Støre fundamentalt feil; han tenker at Trump har en nogenlunde oppegående hjerne med tilnærmet normal respons, mens realiteten er at Trump er jo akkurat som sine tanketomme følgere. "Alle politikere juger", så dermed anser han at Støre = Trump, og hele Nobel-prisen er kun et politisk verktøy i hendene på den norske stat.
Det har vi jo fått bevist flere ganger
- Ble medlem
- 28.09.2016
- Innlegg
- 13.291
- Antall liker
- 15.144
I denne konteksten er innlegget ditt like dumt som en helt vanlig Trump-pressekonferanse.
ja selvfølgelig
alt for å ikke innrømme at Støre jugerMark Carney snakket klokt i Davos, mellom linjer hører man; « fuck you trump «.
Snakk om en leder, Kanada er heldig.
Ikke minst, Carney har tatt saken i egen hånd med en gang trump kom til makta.
Han følget ikke nøye med, ventet ikke, han handlet I landet sitt beste interesse.
Ja, fordi vi ikke har utpekt en felles diktator, enda?
Offtopic emnet, om du ikke vil sluter du bare å følge tråden.
Stemmer det, dette er et hifi-forum, men noen av oss er faktisk interessert i verden rundt oss, og å diskutere den med våre likemenn(og kvinner). Og de finner vi her, og mange av dem er både kunnskaprike og smarte.
Så derfor.
Men hvorfor deltar DU i denne tråden?
Får du vondt i meningene dine av at folk diskuterer?
Her er teksten. Den vil stå seg, denne talen:
"It’s a pleasure – and a duty – to be with you at this turning point for Canada and for the world.
Today, I’ll talk about the rupture in the world order, the end of a nice story, and the beginning of a brutal reality where geopolitics among the great powers is not subject to any constraints.
But I also submit to you that other countries, particularly middle powers like Canada, are not powerless. They have the capacity to build a new order that embodies our values, like respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of states.
The power of the less powerful begins with honesty.
Every day we are reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry. That the rules-based order is fading. That the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.
This aphorism of Thucydides is presented as inevitable – the natural logic of international relations reasserting itself. And faced with this logic, there is a strong tendency for countries to go along to get along. To accommodate. To avoid trouble. To hope that compliance will buy safety.
It won’t.
So, what are our options?
In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel wrote an essay called The Power of the Powerless. In it, he asked a simple question: how did the communist system sustain itself?
His answer began with a greengrocer. Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world, unite!” He does not believe it. No one believes it. But he places the sign anyway – to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists.
Not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Havel called this “living within a lie.” The system’s power comes not from its truth but from everyone’s willingness to perform as if it were true. And its fragility comes from the same source: when even one person stops performing — when the greengrocer removes his sign — the illusion begins to crack.
It is time for companies and countries to take their signs down.
For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, praised its principles, and benefited from its predictability. We could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.
We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false. That the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient. That trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods: open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security, and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
So, we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals. And largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.
This bargain no longer works.
Let me be direct: we are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.
Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy, and geopolitics laid bare the risks of extreme global integration.
More recently, great powers began using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
You cannot “live within the lie” of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.
The multilateral institutions on which middle powers relied— the WTO, the UN, the COP – the architecture of collective problem solving – are greatly diminished.
As a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions. They must develop greater strategic autonomy: in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance, and supply chains.
This impulse is understandable. A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.
But let us be clear-eyed about where this leads. A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile, and less sustainable.
And there is another truth: if great powers abandon even the pretence of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from “transactionalism” become harder to replicate. Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships.
Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty. Buy insurance. Increase options. This rebuilds sovereignty – sovereignty that was once grounded in rules, but will be increasingly anchored in the ability to withstand pressure.
As I said, such classic risk management comes at a price, but that cost of strategic autonomy, of sovereignty, can also be shared. Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortress. Shared standards reduce fragmentation. Complementarities are positive sum.
The question for middle powers, like Canada, is not whether to adapt to this new reality. We must. The question is whether we adapt by simply building higher walls – or whether we can do something more ambitious.
Canada was amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture.
Canadians know that our old, comfortable assumption that our geography and alliance memberships automatically conferred prosperity and security is no longer valid.
Our new approach rests on what Alexander Stubb has termed “values-based realism” – or, to put it another way, we aim to be principled and pragmatic.
Principled in our commitment to fundamental values: sovereignty and territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter, respect for human rights.
Pragmatic in recognising that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner shares our values. We are engaging broadly, strategically, with open eyes. We actively take on the world as it is, not wait for a world we wish to be.
Canada is calibrating our relationships so their depth reflects our values. We are prioritising broad engagement to maximise our influence, given the fluidity of the world order, the risks that this poses, and the stakes for what comes next.
We are no longer relying on just the strength of our values, but also on the value of our strength.
We are building that strength at home.
Since my government took office, we have cut taxes on incomes, capital gains and business investment, we have removed all federal barriers to interprovincial trade, and we are fast-tracking a trillion dollars of investment in energy, AI, critical minerals, new trade corridors, and beyond.
We are doubling our defence spending by 2030 and are doing so in ways that builds our domestic industries.
We are rapidly diversifying abroad. We have agreed a comprehensive strategic partnership with the European Union, including joining SAFE, Europe’s defence procurement arrangements.
We have signed twelve other trade and security deals on four continents in the last six months.
In the past few days, we have concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar.
We are negotiating free trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines, Mercosur.
To help solve global problems, we are pursuing variable geometry— different coalitions for different issues, based on values and interests.
On Ukraine, we are a core member of the Coalition of the Willing and one of the largest per-capita contributors to its defence and security.
On Arctic sovereignty, we stand firmly with Greenland and Denmark and fully support their unique right to determine Greenland’s future. Our commitment to Article 5 is unwavering.
We are working with our NATO allies (including the Nordic Baltic 8 to further secure the alliance’s northern and western flanks, including through Canada’s unprecedented investments in over-the-horizon radar, submarines, aircraft, and boots on the ground. Canada strongly opposes tariffs over Greenland and calls for focused talks to achieve shared objectives of security and prosperity for the Arctic.
On plurilateral trade, we are championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union, creating a new trading block of 1.5 billion people.
On critical minerals, we are forming buyer’s clubs anchored in the G7 so that the world can diversify away from concentrated supply.
On AI, we are cooperating with like-minded democracies to ensure we will not ultimately be forced to choose between hegemons and hyperscalers.
This is not naive multilateralism. Nor is it relying on diminished institutions. It is building the coalitions that work, issue by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together. In some cases, this will be the vast majority of nations.
And it is creating a dense web of connections across trade, investment, culture on which we can draw for future challenges and opportunities.
Middle powers must act together because if you are not at the table, you are on the menu.
Great powers can afford to go it alone. They have the market size, the military capacity, the leverage to dictate terms. Middle powers do not. But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It is the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.
In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice: to compete with each other for favour or to combine to create a third path with impact.
We should not allow the rise of hard power to blind us to the fact that the power of legitimacy, integrity, and rules will remain strong — if we choose to wield it together.
Which brings me back to Havel.
What would it mean for middle powers to “live in truth”?
It means naming reality. Stop invoking the “rules-based international order” as though it still functions as advertised. Call the system what it is: a period of intensifying great power rivalry, where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as a weapon of coercion.
It means acting consistently. Apply the same standards to allies and rivals. When middle powers criticise economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.
It means building what we claim to believe in. Rather than waiting for the old order to be restored, create institutions and agreements that function as described.
And it means reducing the leverage that enables coercion. Building a strong domestic economy should always be every government’s priority. Diversification internationally is not just economic prudence; it is the material foundation for honest foreign policy. Countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.
Canada has what the world wants. We are an energy superpower. We hold vast reserves of critical minerals. We have the most educated population in the world. Our pension funds are amongst the world’s largest and most sophisticated investors. We have capital, talent, and a government with the immense fiscal capacity to act decisively.
And we have the values to which many others aspire.
Canada is a pluralistic society that works. Our public square is loud, diverse, and free. Canadians remain committed to sustainability.
We are a stable, reliable partner—in a world that is anything but—a partner that builds and values relationships for the long term.
Canada has something else: a recognition of what is happening and a determination to act accordingly.
We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.
We are taking the sign out of the window.
The old order is not coming back. We should not mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy.
But from the fracture, we can build something better, stronger, and more just.
This is the task of the middle powers, who have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from a world of genuine cooperation.
The powerful have their power. But we have something too – the capacity to stop pretending, to name reality, to build our strength at home, and to act together.
That is Canada’s path. We choose it openly and confidently.
And it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us."Sist redigert:
Klassisk fascistisk trekk; splitt og hersk + sterkestes rett til bare å ta for segHer er Trump pressekonf. Han får et spørsmål om Starmer og Macron, går deretter over til Norge og får enda et spørsmål som fyrer ham opp. Nevner at Norge bruker Nordsjøen -- a tremendous resource that Great Britain should use more. Vi kan vel regne med at Trump syns delelinjen ligger feil. Deretter angriper han Norge pga Nobelprisen.
Trump speaks at White House press briefing — 1/20/2026
President Donald Trump speaks at a press briefing with reporters on Tuesday.For access to live and exclusive video from CNBC subscribe to CNBC PRO: https://c...
vi er på tur tilbake til steinalderen og ur menneskene, nå skapt av high tech
- Ble medlem
- 28.09.2016
- Innlegg
- 13.291
- Antall liker
- 15.144
Det er selvsagt ikke poenget; og om du tenker deg litt om, vil du sikkert forstå dette.
Det er INGEN politikere i fungerende demokratier som opptrer noe i nærheten av det Trump gjør, og det taler neppe til noens fordel om de ikke innser dette enkle faktum. -
Laster inn…
Diskusjonstråd Se tråd i gallerivisning
-
Laster inn…