Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (16) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84362 
Subject: Re: Trump blithers at World Economic Forum
Date: 01/24/25 12:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 6
But rather than agreeing or supporting his efforts, some find it more important to criticize Trump for showing compassion for the human suffering in both the UK and Russian and attempting to do something about it.

I don't think anyone is criticizing the showing of compassion for human suffering, if that was what Trump was trying to do. They're criticizing him for being inarticulate in trying to convey that. Trump's manner of speaking might appeal to some audiences - but it's disjointed and difficult to follow at times. A master orator, he is not. Which, okay, not everyone is. But if you can't actually convey compassion for human suffering when speaking off the cuff without prepared comments, then it's not a great decision to try.

OK, I've had my say. Time for some what about-ism's, but I would prefer instead an explanation why Trumps approach to the UK war is a bad one.

What approach, exactly? He hasn't really laid out what his strategy is for approaching the war. All we know so far is what he's done - which is basically to publicly tell the parties that they should stop the war. Which is....I mean, it would be nice if they just stopped the war, but just telling them to do it isn't likely to make it happen.

Trump projected confidence on the stump that all he'd have to do is get elected and tell them to stop and they'd listen, presumably because they would be so cowed by the newly-strong America. Maybe he believed it. But Putin knows that Trump isn't sending US troops to the Ukraine, doesn't especially want to keep sending weapons and money to Ukraine, probably doesn't have any more sanction levers to pull directly against Russia, and is fraying relations with all the other OECD powers whose cooperation would be necessary to ratchet up economic pressure on Russia any further. And Ukraine isn't likely to stop fighting unless and until Trump actually cuts off the resources and materiel.

So - maybe just ordering them to stop fighting will work? Maybe Trump's ascension is enough of a game-changer that they don't have to actually do anything different to stop the fighting? But if it doesn't, I'm not sure what the approach is.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (16) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community