[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Cache stopped working on old Android Phone - Eisenwindel - Mar 19, 2024 - 1:50am
 
Trump - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 19, 2024 - 12:27am
 
Israel - R_P - Mar 18, 2024 - 11:09pm
 
Wordle - daily game - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:26pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - fractalv - Mar 18, 2024 - 9:09pm
 
March 2024 Photo Theme - Many - fractalv - Mar 18, 2024 - 9:08pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:24pm
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - Bill_J - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:23pm
 
Damn Dinosaurs! - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:16pm
 
New Forum Member on "What Makes RP Great" - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:02pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:00pm
 
Irony 101 - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 7:55pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 7:35pm
 
One Partying State - Wyoming News - geoff_morphini - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:58pm
 
Great guitar faces - skyguy - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:33pm
 
The Obituary Page - kurtster - Mar 18, 2024 - 1:51pm
 
Despots, dictators and war criminals - R_P - Mar 18, 2024 - 12:41pm
 
Uploading Music - dischuckin - Mar 18, 2024 - 11:55am
 
Media Matters - thisbody - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:03am
 
NYTimes Connections - geoff_morphini - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:26am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - jarro - Mar 18, 2024 - 6:37am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 18, 2024 - 5:42am
 
NASA & other news from space - miamizsun - Mar 18, 2024 - 4:13am
 
2024 Elections! - R_P - Mar 17, 2024 - 11:43am
 
Basketball - geoff_morphini - Mar 17, 2024 - 11:11am
 
MEALTICKET - drinpt - Mar 17, 2024 - 4:13am
 
What makes you smile? - Steely_D - Mar 16, 2024 - 7:31pm
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Mar 16, 2024 - 2:07pm
 
Apple Computer - GeneP59 - Mar 16, 2024 - 12:02pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Steely_D - Mar 16, 2024 - 11:41am
 
Environment - R_P - Mar 16, 2024 - 11:18am
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Mar 16, 2024 - 10:48am
 
Caching to Apple watch quit working - lsiegel - Mar 16, 2024 - 8:12am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Mar 15, 2024 - 2:47pm
 
Joe Biden - black321 - Mar 15, 2024 - 2:33pm
 
Artificial Intelligence - miamizsun - Mar 15, 2024 - 12:15pm
 
the Todd Rundgren topic - Steely_D - Mar 15, 2024 - 11:01am
 
Things You Thought Today - kurtster - Mar 15, 2024 - 10:37am
 
Republican Party - islander - Mar 15, 2024 - 9:08am
 
How's the weather? - miamizsun - Mar 15, 2024 - 6:53am
 
Radio Paradise app on Android is broken - timmus - Mar 15, 2024 - 5:25am
 
Ukraine - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 14, 2024 - 10:17pm
 
Democratic Party - R_P - Mar 14, 2024 - 3:04pm
 
The Chomsky / Zinn Reader - thisbody - Mar 14, 2024 - 2:00pm
 
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum - thisbody - Mar 14, 2024 - 1:54pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - thisbody - Mar 14, 2024 - 12:31pm
 
China - R_P - Mar 14, 2024 - 11:52am
 
Android App Problems After Update - jarro - Mar 14, 2024 - 12:58am
 
Russia - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 13, 2024 - 11:59am
 
It's the economy stupid. - kurtster - Mar 13, 2024 - 11:22am
 
How do I get songs into My Favorites - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 13, 2024 - 10:11am
 
Jazz channel? - Steely_D - Mar 13, 2024 - 9:13am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Mar 13, 2024 - 2:01am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - miamizsun - Mar 12, 2024 - 11:17am
 
Frequent drop outs (The Netherlands) - ScopPics - Mar 12, 2024 - 7:20am
 
If not RP, what are you listening to right now? - Beaker - Mar 11, 2024 - 12:37am
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - Red_Dragon - Mar 10, 2024 - 11:02am
 
female vocalists - Steely_D - Mar 10, 2024 - 9:13am
 
New Music - whatshisname - Mar 9, 2024 - 4:27pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - Coaxial - Mar 9, 2024 - 1:09pm
 
Outstanding Covers - skyguy - Mar 9, 2024 - 9:23am
 
Ridiculous or Funny Spam - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 9, 2024 - 8:31am
 
Oh dear god, BEES! - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 9, 2024 - 8:24am
 
Maybe it's just the beer talking... - Proclivities - Mar 8, 2024 - 12:04pm
 
History - lather, rinse, repeat. - R_P - Mar 8, 2024 - 10:12am
 
Big Pharma - black321 - Mar 8, 2024 - 9:33am
 
Can't find Radio 2050 in my Ocean Digital Tuner - sjagminas1 - Mar 8, 2024 - 7:57am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Mar 7, 2024 - 6:50pm
 
Music Videos - Red_Dragon - Mar 7, 2024 - 6:21pm
 
Climate Change - Manbird - Mar 7, 2024 - 2:58pm
 
what else do you listen to? (RP alternatives) - haresfur - Mar 7, 2024 - 1:43pm
 
~ Have a good joke you can post? ~ - black321 - Mar 7, 2024 - 12:17pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - oldviolin - Mar 7, 2024 - 11:56am
 
Did the punishment fit the Crime? - oldviolin - Mar 7, 2024 - 11:43am
 
The US of A telling Russia not to invade Ukraine is like... - GeneP59 - Mar 7, 2024 - 8:42am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Brexit Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Post to this Topic
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 28, 2023 - 11:21am

Listen up, plebs
Britons ‘need to accept’ they’re poorer, says Bank of England economist
Chief economist Huw Pill says workers and firms should stop trying to pass on rising costs by hiking prices or demanding better wages
haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 26, 2021 - 5:31pm

 R_P wrote:

As long as they aren't allowed to stay, right?
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 26, 2021 - 4:48pm

U.K. offers thousands of visas to foreign truckers to ease driver shortage.
coding_to_music

coding_to_music Avatar

Location: Beantown
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 12, 2021 - 10:38pm

 miamizsun wrote:


busy day for me

a few coffee thoughts

handing over power and giving up control to (unaccountable and unelected) bureaucrats sounds like a really bad idea

a recipe for high powered political capture and corruption

how does one disagree or say no to destructive policy?

top down centralized planning has a dark side

top down centralized force

can't these countries come up with a basic trading framework without sacrificing sovereignty?

in a sense it reminds me of what china is doing or accused of doing 

forging some sort of alliance in the name of progress that commits them (via political agreements) to china through debt

controlling currency and debt is a way for a banking entity to take over a country without firing a shot

peace

 



My take is Brexit was made to happen so to break down the economy, break the interdependence of individuals in the EU and UK.
Now people don't know each other and don't trade with each other which suits the big multi-nationals just fine.

similar to how covid restrictions have had the effect of destroying small local business and helping big business, and increasing social isolation and dependence on the government. Pretty clever.
coding_to_music

coding_to_music Avatar

Location: Beantown
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 12, 2021 - 7:12pm

A passage from Fintan O'Toole's "Heroic Failure: Brexit and the Politics of Pain" - a very telling anecdote about Boris Johnson.
OPINION

r/brexit
•Posted byu/outhouse_steakhouse
incognito ecto-nomad 🇮🇪
7 hours ago
Gold
A passage from Fintan O'Toole's "Heroic Failure: Brexit and the Politics of Pain" - a very telling anecdote about Boris Johnson.
OPINION
In 2001, Boris Johnson, then editor of the Spectator, was seeking to launch his political career by being adopted as Tory candidate for the safe seat of Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire. The selection convention was held in the village hall in Benson where the presence of the members of the South Oxfordshire Conservative Association was made known by ‘the bonnet-to-bonnet array of shiny Jags and Mercs’ parked outside. Johnson wooed them with a homily about toast. His wife Marina, he said, had given birth to one of their children in a National Health Service hospital. The staff had brought her toast but while she slept Boris had scoffed the lot.

And your wife wakes up and says, I say, what happened to that toast? And you say I'm afraid it's not longer with us, or not directly with us ha ha ha; and your wife says, Well, what's the point of you? Why don't you go out and hunt stroke gather some more toast as your forefathers did in the olden days? And you go into the highways and by ways of the maternity hospital, and I tell you, Mr Chairman, there are babies popping out all over the place; and then you find the person who is i/c toast, and you ask for some more, and there isn't any more of course, Mr Chairman, because you have had your ration, and when you move to open your wallet, you find that this is no good either. You can't pay for things on the NHS. It's a universal service free at the point of delivery, delivery being the operative word Mr Chairman, ha ha ha. And the whole point of the saga is that it ought to be possible for a well-heeled journalist, who has been so improvident as to eat his wife's toast in the middle of the night, to pay for some more... And this is not as trivial as it sounds, because we need to think about new ways of getting private money into the NHS.

This speech sufficiently impressed the members of the South Oxfordshire Conservative Association that they chose Johnson as a worthy successor to their retiring MP, Michael Heseltine, one of the finest political rhetoricians of his time. But though it may not be in the great tradition of Edmund Burke, it is nonetheless worthy of attention for it contains many of the seeds of Brexit. First, there is the naughty-boy roguish charm. It is a (slightly) grown-up version of a Just William story, where instead of stealing a cake at the vicar's tea party, Boris is wolfing his wife’s toast. It is disarmingly childish. It functions as an English version of the famous Stanford marshmallow test, in which children’s capacity for delayed gratification was assessed by offering them a choice between one treat now or two treats a little later. Boris fails the toast test - even his wife's suffering in childbirth is not enough to make him prioritize her needs over his own. Yet even while confessing his sin, he is also evoking the thrills of rebelling against constraint. The none too subliminal message is: screw delayed gratification.

Secondly, the story contains a parable of British politics over the previous half-century. The ‘person who is i/c toast’ is a parody of the officiousness of a wartime economy and of nationalized industry. Johnson evokes the rationing of food and other necessities that characterized Post-war austerity in Britain: ‘you have had your ration’. This austere egalitarianism ought to have been banished by the Thatcherite market revolution. But the rights of the wealthy are being denied: it ought to be possible for a well-heeled journalist to open his wallet and command the anonymous minion to obey the laws of supply and demand. Only the hangover of socialistic regulation stands in the way of our hero’s attainment of his goal of more toast. We almost forget - as we are meant to - that the blame for poor Marina’s famishment lies, not with toast-withholding socialism but with the selfish oaf who ate her bread.
Coaxial

Coaxial Avatar

Location: Comfortably numb in So Texas
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2019 - 5:55am

 miamizsun wrote:
didn't the people vote to leave the eu already?

or was that fake news?
 

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2019 - 5:06am

didn't the people vote to leave the eu already?

or was that fake news?
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 10, 2019 - 3:43pm

Brexit: chants of 'shame' as suspension of parliament descends into chaos
Five-week suspension begins with shouts, singing and signs reading ‘silenced’

R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 6, 2019 - 12:44pm


R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 6, 2019 - 10:50am


R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 30, 2019 - 9:21am


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 6, 2019 - 7:53am

 miamizsun wrote:


busy day for me

a few coffee thoughts

handing over power and giving up control to (unaccountable and unelected) bureaucrats sounds like a really bad idea

a recipe for high powered political capture and corruption

how does one disagree or say no to destructive policy?

top down centralized planning has a dark side

top down centralized force

can't these countries come up with a basic trading framework without sacrificing sovereignty?

in a sense it reminds me of what china is doing or accused of doing 

forging some sort of alliance in the name of progress that commits them (via political agreements) to china through debt

controlling currency and debt is a way for a banking entity to take over a country without firing a shot

peace

 
 
I'd say you're wrong (or I misled you) on almost all points.

1. The final decisions are still made by elected representatives who are accountable.  The bureaucrats are there (like in every government around the world) to hammer out the nuts and bolts and do the leg work
2. You can say no to destructive EU policy but you might not want to. For example, many left wing voters, particularly in Greece and other southern nations, think fiscal prudence (austerity) is a destructive policy and nearly left the EU on account of it, but decided not to as they realized they are better off in than out.
3. This is centralized government, not centralized planning which smacks of a command economy. The private sector is very robust in many European countries and boasts manyl world-beaters in their respective fields.
4. The central legal framework has actually freed up some border zones from oppressive national governments. The Irish problem disappeared in large part due to the open border. The Basques and Catalans can entertain the thought of independence in a way that they wouldn't be able to if Spain were not part of the EU.  I wouldn't be surprised if Scotland leaves the UK and returns to the EU.
5. As I stated, what saves the EU is the pluralism and consensus politics. Too many people are involved for nepotism or other forms of corruption.
6. The EU involves huge transfers from the net contributors (high GDP nations) to net takers (low GDP nations). It is the opposite of debt bondage. 

The one point that does have some validity is that the one currency benefits net exporters like Germany whose national currency would otherwise appreciate in response to their trading surplus to the detriment of net importers. This is offset to some extent by the system of transfers. 
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 6, 2019 - 6:02am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
As a governing institution, the EU is a huge behemoth of civil servants and politicians who come together to hammer out generally rational comprises about how they can create consensus and then put this into law. In each case multiply this with the complexity of about twenty different languages and the plurality of views and national interests and factor in the doctrine of at least trying to find consensus on every issue and you'll get some idea of how complex this is.

And given that most national law is ultimately made by EU political institutions, it is astonishing how little of it enters the public discussion until it gets passed down to the various national assemblies who enact "implementing regulations" that basically translate EU law into national law, quite often after the horse has bolted.
 

busy day for me

a few coffee thoughts

handing over power and giving up control to (unaccountable and unelected) bureaucrats sounds like a really bad idea

a recipe for high powered political capture and corruption

how does one disagree or say no to destructive policy?

top down centralized planning has a dark side

top down centralized force

can't these countries come up with a basic trading framework without sacrificing sovereignty?

in a sense it reminds me of what china is doing or accused of doing 

forging some sort of alliance in the name of progress that commits them (via political agreements) to china through debt

controlling currency and debt is a way for a banking entity to take over a country without firing a shot

peace

 

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 6, 2019 - 2:21am



 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

Being a boilerplate for internationalism is only half the story. The other half is the amazing strength of the often unseen institutions that make that international cooperation function. 

There is a lot of antagonism towards the EU from neoliberals, like Rees-Moog who view the EU as some gigantic protectionist racket. The unfortunate thing is that such charges are not entirely without justification. 

As a governing institution, the EU is a huge behemoth of civil servants and politicians who come together to hammer out generally rational comprises about how they can create consensus and then put this into law. In each case multiply this with the complexity of about twenty different languages and the plurality of views and national interests and factor in the doctrine of at least trying to find consensus on every issue and you'll get some idea of how complex this is.

And given that most national law is ultimately made by EU political institutions, it is astonishing how little of it enters the public discussion until it gets passed down to the various national assemblies who enact "implementing regulations" that basically translate EU law into national law, quite often after the horse has bolted.

However, after dissing it like this, I actually think living in the EU is fantastic, precisely because of the plurality of views and the consensus-driven politics.. There is an awful lot of really good law that sets out to protect individuals and consumers, the general data protection regulation, being perhaps the most visible recent example. 

Other laws are a ban on genetically modified produce. The EU does not allow hormone-treated beef to be imported, from Australia for instance, or chlorinated chicken from the States, etc. 

Whether you see these as protectionist rackets to shore up vested EU interests or genuinely good laws to protect your average consumer is often just a matter of personal opinion and/or political affiliation.

Without a doubt, large companies (not just US companies) would like to break into the EU market, a) because it is huge and b) because they can easily undercut EU prices due to the various practices they have to raise yields/lower costs etc. that are banned here. But to do this, they need someone to come along and break open the massive amount of legislation that keeps the whole thing intact. Hence Brexit.

No wonder this is a highly charged issue. Trump put his foot in it this week, by saying the NHS would also be on the table in any trade deal between the US and the UK, although there is evidence he didn't actually know what the NHS was at the time. Nevertheless, that slip of the tongue made many people realize what is actually at stake here.

 


 
Thanks Noenz!  Gives us an objective on the ground synopsis!

R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 5, 2019 - 2:31pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
(...) Trump put his foot in it this week, by saying the NHS would also be on the table in any trade deal between the US and the UK, although there is evidence he didn't actually know what the NHS was at the time. Nevertheless, that slip of the tongue made many people realize what is actually at stake here.

He/they know(s). (May '18)

Profit Over People.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 5, 2019 - 2:05pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
steeler wrote:
I have been puzzled for quite a while regarding why Trump has been vocal in advocating for Great Britain to leave the European Union (Brexit). Can anyone explain to me why this is an issue one way or the other for the United States? Is this just part of Trump's "nationalism" theme — everyone should go it alone? It would seem to me that a U.S. President would not take a stance on such an issue, saying that it is something for the people of Great Britain to decide. I just cannot figure out why the U.S. has a dog in that particular fight. Anyone?

I think we do have a dog in that fight, it's just that Trump is rooting for the other dog.

The EU is the flagship project of internationalists, and they have become everybody's favorite booggiemen. Until Trump got elected your political party paid at least lip service to supporting trade barriers and such; NAFTA passed over strident Democratic opposition, as did fast-tracking the TPP negotiations. At least as long as a Republican was in the White House.

Don't look for rational reasons here, this is chest-thumping demagoguery.

 
Being a boilerplate for internationalism is only half the story. The other half is the amazing strength of the often unseen institutions that make that international cooperation function. 

There is a lot of antagonism towards the EU from neoliberals, like Rees-Moog who view the EU as some gigantic protectionist racket. The unfortunate thing is that such charges are not entirely without justification. 

As a governing institution, the EU is a huge behemoth of civil servants and politicians who come together to hammer out generally rational comprises about how they can create consensus and then put this into law. In each case multiply this with the complexity of about twenty different languages and the plurality of views and national interests and factor in the doctrine of at least trying to find consensus on every issue and you'll get some idea of how complex this is.

And given that most national law is ultimately made by EU political institutions, it is astonishing how little of it enters the public discussion until it gets passed down to the various national assemblies who enact "implementing regulations" that basically translate EU law into national law, quite often after the horse has bolted.

However, after dissing it like this, I actually think living in the EU is fantastic, precisely because of the plurality of views and the consensus-driven politics.. There is an awful lot of really good law that sets out to protect individuals and consumers, the general data protection regulation, being perhaps the most visible recent example. 

Other laws are a ban on genetically modified produce. The EU does not allow hormone-treated beef to be imported, from Australia for instance, or chlorinated chicken from the States, etc. 

Whether you see these as protectionist rackets to shore up vested EU interests or genuinely good laws to protect your average consumer is often just a matter of personal opinion and/or political affiliation.

Without a doubt, large companies (not just US companies) would like to break into the EU market, a) because it is huge and b) because they can easily undercut EU prices due to the various practices they have to raise yields/lower costs etc. that are banned here. But to do this, they need someone to come along and break open the massive amount of legislation that keeps the whole thing intact. Hence Brexit.

No wonder this is a highly charged issue. Trump put his foot in it this week, by saying the NHS would also be on the table in any trade deal between the US and the UK, although there is evidence he didn't actually know what the NHS was at the time. Nevertheless, that slip of the tongue made many people realize what is actually at stake here.

 


Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 5, 2019 - 12:43pm

steeler wrote:
I have been puzzled for quite a while regarding why Trump has been vocal in advocating for Great Britain to leave the European Union (Brexit). Can anyone explain to me why this is an issue one way or the other for the United States? Is this just part of Trump's "nationalism" theme — everyone should go it alone? It would seem to me that a U.S. President would not take a stance on such an issue, saying that it is something for the people of Great Britain to decide. I just cannot figure out why the U.S. has a dog in that particular fight. Anyone?

I think we do have a dog in that fight, it's just that Trump is rooting for the other dog.

The EU is the flagship project of internationalists, and they have become everybody's favorite booggiemen. Until Trump got elected your political party paid at least lip service to supporting trade barriers and such; NAFTA passed over strident Democratic opposition, as did fast-tracking the TPP negotiations. At least as long as a Republican was in the White House.

Don't look for rational reasons here, this is chest-thumping demagoguery.
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jun 5, 2019 - 11:43am



 steeler wrote:
I have been puzzled for quite a while regarding why Trump has been vocal in advocating for Great Britain to leave the European Union (Brexit). .....
 
The easy answer is tribalism.  Pure and simple.   Ethno-nationalism might be a more accurate label.


Though, frankly, most of us should be familiar with the Trump persona by now.  Brexit means a weaker isolated UK and thus a partner that can be bullied and intimidated in trade negotiations for the apparent benefit of Americans.

A united EU including Britain is simply too formidable.

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 5, 2019 - 11:10am

 steeler wrote:
I have been puzzled for quite a while regarding why Trump has been vocal in advocating for Great Britain to leave the European Union (Brexit). Can anyone explain to me why this is an issue one way or the other for the United States? Is this just part of Trump's "nationalism" theme — everyone should go it alone? It would seem to me that a U.S. President would not take a stance on such an issue, saying that it is something for the people of Great Britain to decide. I just cannot figure out why the U.S. has a dog in that particular fight. Anyone?
�4��

 

if i were trying to figure out what may be behind trump's interest in brexit , i'd probably start with influences like steve bannon

or any other people around trump (or in his circle) that shape policy and/or philosophical position

i suspect bannon is hugely influential in the china negotiations as well

regards

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 5, 2019 - 9:55am



 steeler wrote:
I have been puzzled for quite a while regarding why Trump has been vocal in advocating for Great Britain to leave the European Union (Brexit). Can anyone explain to me why this is an issue one way or the other for the United States? Is this just part of Trump's "nationalism" theme — everyone should go it alone? It would seem to me that a U.S. President would not take a stance on such an issue, saying that it is something for the people of Great Britain to decide. I just cannot figure out why the U.S. has a dog in that particular fight. Anyone?






�4��
 
Because weakening Europe is a priority of Putin and he has convinced Trump it is a good thing

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next