You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

The odious Tate brothers released & heading for the USA

Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 176,738

Comments

  • Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 176,738


    Think we can bet good money that Trump is behind this.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
    Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan have left Romania for the US - reports
    Andrew Tate - a champion of Donald Trump - and his brother are on a private plane to Florida, according to Romanian media.




    It comes after the Trump administration lobbied their Romanian counterparts to ease the constraints, according to a report in The Financial Times last week.


    https://news.sky.com/story/andrew-tate-and-his-brother-tristan-have-left-romania-for-the-us-reports-13317873
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
    Tikay10 said:



    Think we can bet good money that Trump is behind this.

    In the name of free speech?
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
    Trump Pressures Romania on Andrew Tate in Stunning New Low
    The Trump administration is harassing Romania about easing up on the far-right misogynist accused of sex trafficking.





    Last month, Elon Musk expressed support for Tate’s strange bid to become prime minister of the UK. It’s possible that he thinks entering office could shield him from prosecution. Where have we seen that before?

    Now, Trump seems to be searching for ways to pay back his staunch supporters—no matter how grotesque the accusations against them.

    https://newrepublic.com/post/191597/trump-romania-andrew-tate
  • mumsiemumsie Member Posts: 8,491
    American politics is playing out like a scene from Batman -Gotham City.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 9,209
    edited February 27
    "America First" is breaking new ground. Horrible, vile new ground.

    Americans have always been the most self-absorbed people in the World. Holding the sort of colonialist views attributed to the worst excesses of the British Empire. In short, the world consists of 2 places-America Good. And the Rest of the World-irrelevant. Or worse.

    When it comes to Domestic Policy, I can see the appeal for Americans. Who can be convinced that America is the only economy that matters. Comes back to his first term, with his ridiculous assertion that "we will build a wall. And the Mexicans will pay for it." Leaving to 1 side that he never built the wall-why on earth would Mexico pay for something that does not benefit them?

    Domestic policy in relation to "America First" has short-term voter appeal. The idea that what sounded pre-election like precise tariffs sounds like a winner. Until you realise that massive amounts of goods used by Americans are either produced abroad, or made from foreign materials. Or that tariffs are a 2-way street. But he is a politician. He cares about winning elections, and being seen as netter than Biden or his successor. Because problems 5 years down the line will not be his problems.

    Foreign policy is a very different matter. This is the 3rd major foreign policy decision. Let's look at what the American position really is now.

    1. Gaza. The "solution" is to force all Gazans out of Gaza. To hand over the land to American developers, to create some sort of Middle East Las Vegas. And the cost of relocating the 2 million or so Gazan people? Muslim countries are to bear the cost of that. The new Mexicans.

    2. Ukraine. The solution is to find "common ground" between Ukraine and Russia. That common ground is to come to an agreement as to which precious minerals belong in Ukrainian hands, and which Russia should keep, probably in the Donbas region. And the price of peace is that both should agree to hand over economic control of those minerals to America.

    3. The Tate brothers. They are half-American. And half-British. They have this year set up a new British political party ("BRUV") and intend to stand for election. They are wanted in Romania and the UK on a string of charges, mainly relating to the rape and sex trafficking of Women. But it has suited America to force Romania to release them from custody. And fly them to America. Not Britain.

    America is the most powerful nation on the world. And seeking to run the world purely for its own benefit.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,667
    I'm just waiting to see if Trump manages to stop these wars. I think that's fundamentally what he's trying to do here with some backdoor benefits for the USA of course. If he does then i'm literally going to change my opinion on him.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 9,209

    I'm just waiting to see if Trump manages to stop these wars. I think that's fundamentally what he's trying to do here with some backdoor benefits for the USA of course. If he does then i'm literally going to change my opinion on him.

    I know what you mean. But I want to mention these facts:-

    1. Gaza. If by "stop the war" the result is instead of Israel temporarily invading it, and temporarily displacing its citizens, it is the USA permanently invading and permanently displacing its citizens, that is too high a price

    2. Ukraine. There is certainly a greater chance of a better settlement for Ukraine (people who believe Ukraine will get all its land back are deluded). But I want to mention the size of those "backdoor benefits". We are supposed to be part of an Alliance in relation to Ukraine. And the USA has been the leader of that alliance. The USA has paid $200-300 Billion in relation to support. Europe has probably paid a similar amount-the UK alone has paid about $20 Billion.

    Here is what has happened since Trump took over. And this is no secret-he is quite open about it. The US has held settlement talks. To which Europe generally, and the UK in particular, were excluded. And he has proposed a settlement deal. Whereby America gets all its outlay back. and Europe/the UK nothing. And future costs of defending Europe to be entirely borne by Europe. Not the US.

    That's not the actions of an Ally.
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,667
    I'm personally not privy to enough detail to really make a case on either side economically or with regard to alignment and NATO etc.

    I'm just seeing this as a play at nullifying mobilisation and escalation and that is first and foremost. Once that's done then perhaps a new deck can be dealt.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 9,209

    I'm personally not privy to enough detail to really make a case on either side economically or with regard to alignment and NATO etc.

    I'm just seeing this as a play at nullifying mobilisation and escalation and that is first and foremost. Once that's done then perhaps a new deck can be dealt.

    Time will tell. You might be right.

    I hope you are.

    Reminded me of the great saying. "The young know everything. The middle-aged suspect everything. and the old believe everything."

    The reason I particularly love it is that each age group thinks it is a criticism of only 2 groups...
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
    Essexphil said:

    I'm just waiting to see if Trump manages to stop these wars. I think that's fundamentally what he's trying to do here with some backdoor benefits for the USA of course. If he does then i'm literally going to change my opinion on him.

    I know what you mean. But I want to mention these facts:-

    1. Gaza. If by "stop the war" the result is instead of Israel temporarily invading it, and temporarily displacing its citizens, it is the USA permanently invading and permanently displacing its citizens, that is too high a price

    2. Ukraine. There is certainly a greater chance of a better settlement for Ukraine (people who believe Ukraine will get all its land back are deluded). But I want to mention the size of those "backdoor benefits". We are supposed to be part of an Alliance in relation to Ukraine. And the USA has been the leader of that alliance. The USA has paid $200-300 Billion in relation to support. Europe has probably paid a similar amount-the UK alone has paid about $20 Billion.

    Here is what has happened since Trump took over. And this is no secret-he is quite open about it. The US has held settlement talks. To which Europe generally, and the UK in particular, were excluded. And he has proposed a settlement deal. Whereby America gets all its outlay back. and Europe/the UK nothing. And future costs of defending Europe to be entirely borne by Europe. Not the US.

    That's not the actions of an Ally.
    There seems to be a real lack of clarity over who has contributed what to Ukraine, and a dispute over the value of the precious minerals that will be available.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 9,209
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    I'm just waiting to see if Trump manages to stop these wars. I think that's fundamentally what he's trying to do here with some backdoor benefits for the USA of course. If he does then i'm literally going to change my opinion on him.

    I know what you mean. But I want to mention these facts:-

    1. Gaza. If by "stop the war" the result is instead of Israel temporarily invading it, and temporarily displacing its citizens, it is the USA permanently invading and permanently displacing its citizens, that is too high a price

    2. Ukraine. There is certainly a greater chance of a better settlement for Ukraine (people who believe Ukraine will get all its land back are deluded). But I want to mention the size of those "backdoor benefits". We are supposed to be part of an Alliance in relation to Ukraine. And the USA has been the leader of that alliance. The USA has paid $200-300 Billion in relation to support. Europe has probably paid a similar amount-the UK alone has paid about $20 Billion.

    Here is what has happened since Trump took over. And this is no secret-he is quite open about it. The US has held settlement talks. To which Europe generally, and the UK in particular, were excluded. And he has proposed a settlement deal. Whereby America gets all its outlay back. and Europe/the UK nothing. And future costs of defending Europe to be entirely borne by Europe. Not the US.

    That's not the actions of an Ally.
    There seems to be a real lack of clarity over who has contributed what to Ukraine, and a dispute over the value of the precious minerals that will be available.
    For sensible reasons.

    Firstly, defining what does, or does not, constitute aid. Secondly, how to calculate even the cost of military aid.

    To give 2 simple examples, Trump has used a method literally no-one else has ever used to calculate the cost of "aid" (which is why his $560 million figure is preposterous). Biden gave a lot of soon to be obsolete weapons to Ukraine-working on the premise that they were going to be used now, rather than just scrapped in a year or two. And Trump has used the cost of replacing those weapons with shiny new ones as the "cost".

    Similarly, do you include (for example) the cost of relocating, housing and supporting thousands of Ukrainian refugees in the UK?

    The minerals? I think Trump is thinking on the fly, and making up numbers. But there is clearly a value, and a substantial one at that. Pont is-his billionaire budskies can spend the sort of money needed to extract them for profit. And 0% of any number is always $0.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    I'm just waiting to see if Trump manages to stop these wars. I think that's fundamentally what he's trying to do here with some backdoor benefits for the USA of course. If he does then i'm literally going to change my opinion on him.

    I know what you mean. But I want to mention these facts:-

    1. Gaza. If by "stop the war" the result is instead of Israel temporarily invading it, and temporarily displacing its citizens, it is the USA permanently invading and permanently displacing its citizens, that is too high a price

    2. Ukraine. There is certainly a greater chance of a better settlement for Ukraine (people who believe Ukraine will get all its land back are deluded). But I want to mention the size of those "backdoor benefits". We are supposed to be part of an Alliance in relation to Ukraine. And the USA has been the leader of that alliance. The USA has paid $200-300 Billion in relation to support. Europe has probably paid a similar amount-the UK alone has paid about $20 Billion.

    Here is what has happened since Trump took over. And this is no secret-he is quite open about it. The US has held settlement talks. To which Europe generally, and the UK in particular, were excluded. And he has proposed a settlement deal. Whereby America gets all its outlay back. and Europe/the UK nothing. And future costs of defending Europe to be entirely borne by Europe. Not the US.

    That's not the actions of an Ally.
    There seems to be a real lack of clarity over who has contributed what to Ukraine, and a dispute over the value of the precious minerals that will be available.
    For sensible reasons.

    Firstly, defining what does, or does not, constitute aid. Secondly, how to calculate even the cost of military aid.

    To give 2 simple examples, Trump has used a method literally no-one else has ever used to calculate the cost of "aid" (which is why his $560 million figure is preposterous). Biden gave a lot of soon to be obsolete weapons to Ukraine-working on the premise that they were going to be used now, rather than just scrapped in a year or two. And Trump has used the cost of replacing those weapons with shiny new ones as the "cost".

    Similarly, do you include (for example) the cost of relocating, housing and supporting thousands of Ukrainian refugees in the UK?

    The minerals? I think Trump is thinking on the fly, and making up numbers. But there is clearly a value, and a substantial one at that. Pont is-his billionaire budskies can spend the sort of money needed to extract them for profit. And 0% of any number is always $0.
    It will be interesting to see what "the deal" actually is.
  • EnutEnut Member Posts: 3,715
    Just imagine if Trump had been in charge during the second world war, we now wouldn't have a Europe, we would just have a Germany....and we would never have won the World Cup in '66.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 9,209
    edited February 27
    Enut said:

    Just imagine if Trump had been in charge during the second world war, we now wouldn't have a Europe, we would just have a Germany....and we would never have won the World Cup in '66.<</b>/blockquote>

    I think any self-respecting Scotsman would say that the reason we won the World Cup in 1966 was because we had done a deal with Russia :)

  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
    Andrew Tate flees to Florida but DeSantis says ‘you’re not welcome’


    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/andrew-tate-brother-tristan-flee-080249321.html
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 38,883
Sign In or Register to comment.