Emir wrote:
What’s exactly wrong with his standpoints?
Sanders is basically a traditional European social democrat.
Silvaire wrote:
The points of view on US politics expressed here are entirely European,
Is that surprising, given that this is EuroGA? No one forces you to read it.
Sanders is viewed by the majority of the US electorate, left or right, as a blithering idiot.
When commenting on US politics in a way that attempts to predict to what degree the US will continue to e.g. provide the defense for Europe, I think it’s useful to have some basic understanding of the form, function, values and process that will create that result. That doesn’t mean it’s going to happen, nor that tabloid level or hopelessly naive views won’t remain prevalent.
I think Europeans would be well served to discuss how they are going to provide their own defense instead – because it’s an issue and challenge that they might understand if they prioritized it.
Emir wrote:
What’s exactly wrong with his standpoints?
The main problem in the US is that both parties have reached a point where they are following their fringes rather than those closer to the aisle. Hence, you get a situation whereby bipartisan work is near impossible. Sanders is part of that on the left just as people like Cruz or DeSantis are on the right.
Many American observers feel that because both parties have been trying to satisfy their outermost exponents, they have become increasingly unable to find common ground across the aisle.
Silvaire wrote:
I think it’s useful to have some basic understanding of the form, function, values and process that will create that result.
@silvaire. Could you enlighten us to what that basic understanding may consist of?
Also I was unaware that the US was providing the defence of Europe. I am aware that there was debate as to the financial contributions from ’’other’’ members, but the reliance of NATO on the US is perhaps stretching a bit. Donald Trump raised this early Presidency and had a spat with that **** Macron over the issues.
No, unfortunately experience has proven I can’t. I would suggest traveling widely in the US and learning as much as I have learned by traveling in Europe. Something like 60 multi-week trips so far, not counting that it’s where I came from originally.
I’ll be in Slovakia next week as part of a road trip to several places and I think it will be interesting to see the local reaction to the Ukrainian war, and perhaps to US involvement if that should perchance come up.
We should have a separate thread called “Silvaire and the government” 
I read somewhere that the main objective for the president in the USA is to protect the USA from foreign hostility. If Trump comes back, we know what that means. Then we have to add – for the least amount of US$. Lots of people in Europe think the same way, and if enough people think the same way, it means Russia has succeeded and large parts of Ukraine will belong to Russia.
Also I was unaware that the US was providing the defence of Europe
That explains quite a lot 
The main problem in the US is that both parties have reached a point where they are following their fringes rather than those closer to the aisle.
The main problem is that if one’s view of the US is derived from specific European media organs, one can get a substantially incorrect view. Europe has always been torn between admiration and loathing of the US (according to whether one is a 20th century history student, or a champagne socialist, respectively) and the media here reflects these camps. The reality is as always more complicated. I recommend Max Hastings and his detailed books.
If support for Ukraine was totally withdrawn, Russia would possibly eventually prevail. I say “possibly” because Ukraine is already stocked up to its ears with enough goodies to drive the Russian meat grinder for a good while. But in the fullness of time Russia probably would invade Ukraine fully, because Russia will always sell enough of what it extracts from the ground to finance a steady production line for weapons. So Ukraine would cease to exist as a country. But the warriors will still be there, and the region would morph into a mega scale insurgency; far bigger than Afghanistan or anything in the Middle East or Africa. Obviously there would be no reconstruction, no future, nobody returning home. History shows that Russia will not spend money on the place.
Everybody supporting Ukraine knows this, which is why they are supporting it. There is no alternative. Putin cannot be allowed to get away with this. And a military defeat of Russia is possible – to the extent of Ukraine’s UN-recognised borders. What will happen after that, nobody can tell, but probably Russia will keep trying to have a go until something changes there internally. Russia cannot sustain the ~2k/day dead+crippled; this is far bigger than Afghanistan. To that extent, the “plan” is fairly clear.
We should have a separate thread called “Silvaire and the government”
Better would be to keep this thread on the topic.
If Trump comes back
Let’s worry about that IF that happens and IF he does something AND gets it through the US govt pipeline.
Lots of people in Europe think the same way,
Yeah – ask them what their “plan” is. Well, apart from retirement to their ivory towers and champagne
Peter wrote:
But in the fullness of time Russia probably would invade Ukraine fully, because Russia will always sell enough of what it extracts from the ground to finance a steady production line for weapons.
Under condition that current dictator lives enough. Historically no Russian dictator continued war of his predecessor.
Peter wrote:
The main problem is that if one’s view of the US is derived from specific European media organs, one can get a substantially incorrect view.
True. Reading European media on US issues is about as accurate as reading US media about Europe. Or worse, see what US fora are talking about Europe and vv. I was lucky enough to sysop some US fora for a while and it’s been quite enlightening as well as very interesting. Also during my time in Gettysburg PA I was able to learn a lot from those people. If the opinion of those who celebrate American history like not many others don’t count, than I don’t know whose do. You can start with the European vs American definition of a “Liberal” which are almost diametrically opposite. Of course, the question of competence to discuss things usually depends on the opinion of those who you try to discuss with…
LeSving wrote:
If Trump comes back, we know what that means.
That is the question. All we know so far is that he braggs he will “end the war in 20 minutes”. How he wishes to accomplish that, I honestly wonder if he knows. And if his “ending of the civil war” in Afghanistan is anything to go by….
Peter wrote:
Let’s worry about that IF that happens and IF he does something AND gets it through the US govt pipeline.
Well, the consideration that it might most certainly plays into how the various parties to this war look at their tactics. Ukraine and Europe would wish the war to be over and won by the time Trump has a chance of coming back, Russia would love to drag it into a new Trump administration….
