In his latest book, Michael Wolff describes Trump as "post-sex." Meaning, as I interpret it, instead of grabbing women by the pussy he's taken to renaming things--as if forcing the rest of us to go along with his "Gulf of America" BS is like grabbing us by the power pussy.
Nothing will stop him from renaming stuff. But some (hey, Congress!) could keep it from sticking. I refuse to raped by Trump's will. But I'm just me.
we had ANZAC day here recently - which is about the first world war initially, but now we honour all who served, no matter the war, because we recognise (imperfectly sometimes) that the two world wars were not in fact the last action our forces have seen and that all of our vets deserve respect. also, some dipshit stood up at one of the dawn services and did a nazi salute and was arrested cos that shit is illegal down here.
I don’t think many in the military have much respect for him. Remember when he called them “suckers and losers”. Also, cuts make to vet programs have really hurt those who’d made sacrifices for our country. Using the military to glorify himself will backfire. The vets and their families and all who care about them will have their own parades and protests against him.
Come out for protests on June 14 & June 6!!! We need everyone!!! Indivisible and others organizing a big day of nationwide counter protests on June 14. Details will be forthcoming at nokings.org
Also ... plans for a big rally of veterans in DC is building for June 6, anniversary of D-Day. See unite4veterans.org. The Dropkick Murphys band will perform at their rally!
Draft him, and make him march in his own stupid parade. There must be a compartmentalized desk somewhere that can send him a draft notice. If he sues to get out of it at least it'll keep him tied up through the summer and we can skip this whole mess.
Trump is a disgrace on so many levels I have lost count. So are my Republican senators, Thom Tillis and the guy who looks like Forrest Gump, Ted Budd. I would have Trump and all of them removed from office if I could, but in lieu of that, here is my newest email letter complaining of their lack of anything like public service.
Ronald Reagan declared that our government was the enemy. That was not true, but under Trump is has become a fact. Governments exist to help the population that lives in the country. Under your boy, and his kleptocratic administration, no money has been saved, Trump gets to go golfing every weekend at the taxpayer's expense, and necessary programs to help the people of this nation are declared, DEI initiatives simply because they help the poor and disadvantaged of this country. But then, I'm sure you are ok with this as long we are saving money to give to Elon Musk.
I cannot wait to vote you out of office as well as any and every Republican I can. You are all a disgrace.
June 14th is (also) "Flag Day". Memo to MAGA: Please note that in the District of Columbia it is illegal to add or display any words or images on the US flag, so none of your Trump trash on the colors thank you very much.
World Pride is in DC that week as well, so I wouldn't put it past Stephen Miller to have seen a chance to give a giant fuck you to the LGBTQ community.
First - I hope the heavens open up and it pours rain on June 14.
Second - How much is it going to cost to paint all those tanks and helicopters gold?
Just when you think you can't get anymore embarrassed for this country, Rump comes up with some new outrage. IT's just a little over hundred days and already I am so tired.
>> The Russians "barely acknowledge any other nation’s contributions, though certainly the Allies tying Germany down in Western Europe helped drain the nation’s resources until the Soviets could rally."
Good article, but you've got the history of World War II exactly backwards here.
It was the Soviet Army that tied down Germany in Eastern Europe that helped drain Germany's resources until the British, Canadians and US could invade in June 1944.
If you've seen the film "Dunkirk," you know that the French were quickly defeated and the British driven from the continent. Between 1940 and 1944 there was no "the Allies tying down Germany down in Western Europe."
Hitler toured Paris, took in the Eiffel Tower, visited Napoleon's tomb. The Allies were tied down across the English Channel, fighting the Battle of Britain.
Meanwhile, the United States was supplying war materiel to the Soviets, so that they could keep Germany occupied while the Allies, could figure out what to do.
Churchill, snakebit by the Dunkirk fiasco and bitter memory of his disastrous amphibious invasion at Gallipoli in the First World War insisted the allies invade North Africa first, then Sicily or Greece, and then mainland Italy. And that is what the Allies did. None of that, did anything to drain German resources from the Russian front.
Finally, in June 1944, after 5 years of war, the Allies invade through Normandy. Germany surrenders in April 1945.
The fine point: It was the Soviets who held the line so that the Americans and British could get their act together, not the other way round.
Driving Rommel out of Africa meant the German's lost easy access to oil in the Middle East. Losing Italy and Greece meant losing access to Mediterranean shipping. Invading Ukraine, the Balkans and Russian became necessary when they couldn't feed their troops or fuel their army and air force.
You may be referring more to the board game axis and allies, then to the actual history of world war II.
What we know from private diplomatic cables and other communications made available since the end of the war, we know that both Roosevelt and Stalin appealed again and again to Churchill for support in creating a second front in Western Europe following the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in June of 1941.
In private, Churchill gave few replies and it was understood that he was scared of repeating his errors at Gallipoli from the first war. In public, Churchill waxed poetic about the supposed quote soft underbelly unquote of Europe. He clearly was pushing the allies to spend their time on the opposite side of the continent and incremental invasions through the Mediterranean islands and Sicily and then ultimately mainland Italy, instead of reversing the Dunkirk disaster and taking the fight to the traditional battlegrounds of France and Belgium. The inability of the Allies to establish a Western front along the same lines that the Germans had invaded France, allowed the Germans to dig in and create the so-called Atlantic Wall across the northern perimeter of France, and to reinforce defenses along the Rhine.
These are all well documented incontrovertible facts, that have formed the basis of historical understanding of the process and prosecution of world war II in the European theater. They've been well understood for decades now, and we're well understood by many at the time. Thus Churchill having to go to the public with his rather thin soft underbelly spin. Knowledgeable people at the time knew that there was no such thing as a soft underbelly of Europe. That even if the invasions through Sicily in Italy proved easy, they ended at the Alps, which were not soft at all!
And we know that the invasions through Sicily and Italy were actually particularly difficult. Not only from a maps and chaps point of view, as you seem to be referring to, but also on the civilian populations. The Nazis committed all manner of atrocities in the mass executions of entire Italian towns, for example, as the allies advanced forward inch by inch of the Italian peninsula.
Again, the issue is with a sentence in the article that says that the Western allies fought to give time for the Soviets to rally. This is simply not true. And it was well understood by people living at the time, who understood that the United States was providing war material to the Soviets in their active fight against the Nazis. American people also understood that the British had been driven from the continent in the early days of the war, and were now cowering underground as they were bombed during the blitz. None of this looks like the allies tying up the Germans in Western Europe to provide some relief for the Soviets.
And all this happened before the attack on Pearl harbor. So the Americans weren't even in the war. That fact alone makes the claim in the article that much more difficult to defend.
You do know that Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of Russia was after Operation Sealion, which the Battle of Britian and the Blitz were part of failed and broke the Luftwaffe?
In fact there was no eastern front until the Germans invaded because Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were allies right up until Germany invaded. They had commercial and military treaties and non aggression pacts. Sure, Stalin would have turned on Germany at some point, but Hitler turned on him first. That's why Soviet partisans in France, for example, didn't join the resistance until after the Germans invaded Russia. The central governments were still friendly and French Soviets were ordered to stand down.
You're also ignoring the war in the pacific and how that tied up the Allies, particularly the US and DUKE forces.
Yes, the Soviets suffered massive casualties. That has a lot to do with Soviet human wave attacks, an absolutely insane lack of planning and non existent logistics, and the shit build quality of just about everything the Soviets produced domestically.
Germany invaded the Soviet Union ("Barbarossa") on June 22, 1941.
The Japanese bomb Pearl harbor Hawaii on December 7th, 1941. America declares war on Nazi Germany the next day.
The Allies invaded Western Europe starting June 6, 1944.
Even from a simple timeline like this it is impossible to say that the allies tied up the Germans in Western Europe to allow the Soviets to rally.
The story of world war II is the exact opposite. The Soviets fought against the Germans, while the Western allies took years to organize an invasion on their side of the continent. These are incontrovertible facts that are well known and well understood and well documented.
Not really. The current Russian government policy is Russia won the war all by itself. They sacrificed more, so they did all the fighting. Any deviation from the official policy will end you up in prison.
They sacrificed more because they had poor quality troops, bad commanders, tactics, and strategies that amounted to "we have reserves", and shit equipment. Plus they had no problem starving or massacring their own civilians as long as they were lesser Soviets and not Russians.
WWII isn't a series of disconnected battles and theaters of operations. What was happening in the Pacific, in Burma, in China, effected what was going on in Europe and Russia. The Battle of Britian shattered the Luftwaffe. It never recovered, especially from the loss of pilots. To claim that did nothing to drain German resources is laughable. Every foot of ground Germany lost in Africa, southern Europe, northern Europe, and everywhere else they conquered drained resources if for no other reason than the Nazis couldn't steal them anymore.
Claiming the Soviets did it on their own is as wrong as claiming the Americans or the British did it all on their own.
You may have confused the words policy and historical interpretation. The two are not the same. And regardless, the the current Russian regime may have an inaccurate historical interpretation of the second world war, but that fact does not make the statement in the wonkette article accurate.
The reality remains that the wonkette article claims that the Allies tied up German military resources in Western Europe, giving the Soviets time to rally. You bring in the Pacific theater and all this other stuff, which has some validity to it, but that does not appear in the clear declarative statement made in the wonkette article.
We are not debating historical interpretations of the Russian regime. Although that was the impetus for the historically inaccurate comment made in the article.
Again, the article claims that the Western allies should get credit for tying up German military resources in Western Europe, the place specified in the line in the article, which then gave time and space for the Soviets to rally. That's the full extent of what we're discussing here.
My accusation was that that claim in the article, that specific one, with all the words in that claim and no more to be added, is just damn wrong. And anyone with a clear understanding of the sequence of events in Western Europe between 1939 and 1945 agrees.
Trump is not a very intelligent man and almost a functional illiterate. Nothing he says surprises me. That idiotic TV show forced his made up character as a brilliant businessman on the American public. Unfortunately, that is the only Donald Trump most people knew when he entered politics. Those of us who knew the REAL Donald Trump were screaming the warnings to the rafters., Not enough people were willing to listen. The REAL Donald Trump is more like the characters in "Tin Men" Old school high pressure bullshit artist
My mom was a kid in Northern Ireland during World War II. I can't imagine Trump's "we did it all, we did more than anybody!" is going down well in the UK or in any European country where the war was actually happening.
In his latest book, Michael Wolff describes Trump as "post-sex." Meaning, as I interpret it, instead of grabbing women by the pussy he's taken to renaming things--as if forcing the rest of us to go along with his "Gulf of America" BS is like grabbing us by the power pussy.
Nothing will stop him from renaming stuff. But some (hey, Congress!) could keep it from sticking. I refuse to raped by Trump's will. But I'm just me.
we had ANZAC day here recently - which is about the first world war initially, but now we honour all who served, no matter the war, because we recognise (imperfectly sometimes) that the two world wars were not in fact the last action our forces have seen and that all of our vets deserve respect. also, some dipshit stood up at one of the dawn services and did a nazi salute and was arrested cos that shit is illegal down here.
I don’t think many in the military have much respect for him. Remember when he called them “suckers and losers”. Also, cuts make to vet programs have really hurt those who’d made sacrifices for our country. Using the military to glorify himself will backfire. The vets and their families and all who care about them will have their own parades and protests against him.
Come out for protests on June 14 & June 6!!! We need everyone!!! Indivisible and others organizing a big day of nationwide counter protests on June 14. Details will be forthcoming at nokings.org
Also ... plans for a big rally of veterans in DC is building for June 6, anniversary of D-Day. See unite4veterans.org. The Dropkick Murphys band will perform at their rally!
Draft him, and make him march in his own stupid parade. There must be a compartmentalized desk somewhere that can send him a draft notice. If he sues to get out of it at least it'll keep him tied up through the summer and we can skip this whole mess.
Trump is a disgrace on so many levels I have lost count. So are my Republican senators, Thom Tillis and the guy who looks like Forrest Gump, Ted Budd. I would have Trump and all of them removed from office if I could, but in lieu of that, here is my newest email letter complaining of their lack of anything like public service.
Ronald Reagan declared that our government was the enemy. That was not true, but under Trump is has become a fact. Governments exist to help the population that lives in the country. Under your boy, and his kleptocratic administration, no money has been saved, Trump gets to go golfing every weekend at the taxpayer's expense, and necessary programs to help the people of this nation are declared, DEI initiatives simply because they help the poor and disadvantaged of this country. But then, I'm sure you are ok with this as long we are saving money to give to Elon Musk.
I cannot wait to vote you out of office as well as any and every Republican I can. You are all a disgrace.
Kids only get 2 dolls, but splurge big on this monstrosity.
If this turns out anything like his rallies, there will be more troops on the road than people in the stands to witness this abomination.
June 14th is (also) "Flag Day". Memo to MAGA: Please note that in the District of Columbia it is illegal to add or display any words or images on the US flag, so none of your Trump trash on the colors thank you very much.
World Pride is in DC that week as well, so I wouldn't put it past Stephen Miller to have seen a chance to give a giant fuck you to the LGBTQ community.
The Gays need to foll[ow behind the Army parade with a float depicting tRump beung guillotined in effigy. 'Happy Bastille Day!'
Two things:
First - I hope the heavens open up and it pours rain on June 14.
Second - How much is it going to cost to paint all those tanks and helicopters gold?
Just when you think you can't get anymore embarrassed for this country, Rump comes up with some new outrage. IT's just a little over hundred days and already I am so tired.
>> The Russians "barely acknowledge any other nation’s contributions, though certainly the Allies tying Germany down in Western Europe helped drain the nation’s resources until the Soviets could rally."
Good article, but you've got the history of World War II exactly backwards here.
It was the Soviet Army that tied down Germany in Eastern Europe that helped drain Germany's resources until the British, Canadians and US could invade in June 1944.
If you've seen the film "Dunkirk," you know that the French were quickly defeated and the British driven from the continent. Between 1940 and 1944 there was no "the Allies tying down Germany down in Western Europe."
Hitler toured Paris, took in the Eiffel Tower, visited Napoleon's tomb. The Allies were tied down across the English Channel, fighting the Battle of Britain.
Meanwhile, the United States was supplying war materiel to the Soviets, so that they could keep Germany occupied while the Allies, could figure out what to do.
Churchill, snakebit by the Dunkirk fiasco and bitter memory of his disastrous amphibious invasion at Gallipoli in the First World War insisted the allies invade North Africa first, then Sicily or Greece, and then mainland Italy. And that is what the Allies did. None of that, did anything to drain German resources from the Russian front.
Finally, in June 1944, after 5 years of war, the Allies invade through Normandy. Germany surrenders in April 1945.
The fine point: It was the Soviets who held the line so that the Americans and British could get their act together, not the other way round.
"insisted the allies invade North Africa first'
Driving Rommel out of Africa meant the German's lost easy access to oil in the Middle East. Losing Italy and Greece meant losing access to Mediterranean shipping. Invading Ukraine, the Balkans and Russian became necessary when they couldn't feed their troops or fuel their army and air force.
You may be referring more to the board game axis and allies, then to the actual history of world war II.
What we know from private diplomatic cables and other communications made available since the end of the war, we know that both Roosevelt and Stalin appealed again and again to Churchill for support in creating a second front in Western Europe following the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in June of 1941.
In private, Churchill gave few replies and it was understood that he was scared of repeating his errors at Gallipoli from the first war. In public, Churchill waxed poetic about the supposed quote soft underbelly unquote of Europe. He clearly was pushing the allies to spend their time on the opposite side of the continent and incremental invasions through the Mediterranean islands and Sicily and then ultimately mainland Italy, instead of reversing the Dunkirk disaster and taking the fight to the traditional battlegrounds of France and Belgium. The inability of the Allies to establish a Western front along the same lines that the Germans had invaded France, allowed the Germans to dig in and create the so-called Atlantic Wall across the northern perimeter of France, and to reinforce defenses along the Rhine.
These are all well documented incontrovertible facts, that have formed the basis of historical understanding of the process and prosecution of world war II in the European theater. They've been well understood for decades now, and we're well understood by many at the time. Thus Churchill having to go to the public with his rather thin soft underbelly spin. Knowledgeable people at the time knew that there was no such thing as a soft underbelly of Europe. That even if the invasions through Sicily in Italy proved easy, they ended at the Alps, which were not soft at all!
And we know that the invasions through Sicily and Italy were actually particularly difficult. Not only from a maps and chaps point of view, as you seem to be referring to, but also on the civilian populations. The Nazis committed all manner of atrocities in the mass executions of entire Italian towns, for example, as the allies advanced forward inch by inch of the Italian peninsula.
Again, the issue is with a sentence in the article that says that the Western allies fought to give time for the Soviets to rally. This is simply not true. And it was well understood by people living at the time, who understood that the United States was providing war material to the Soviets in their active fight against the Nazis. American people also understood that the British had been driven from the continent in the early days of the war, and were now cowering underground as they were bombed during the blitz. None of this looks like the allies tying up the Germans in Western Europe to provide some relief for the Soviets.
And all this happened before the attack on Pearl harbor. So the Americans weren't even in the war. That fact alone makes the claim in the article that much more difficult to defend.
You do know that Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of Russia was after Operation Sealion, which the Battle of Britian and the Blitz were part of failed and broke the Luftwaffe?
In fact there was no eastern front until the Germans invaded because Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were allies right up until Germany invaded. They had commercial and military treaties and non aggression pacts. Sure, Stalin would have turned on Germany at some point, but Hitler turned on him first. That's why Soviet partisans in France, for example, didn't join the resistance until after the Germans invaded Russia. The central governments were still friendly and French Soviets were ordered to stand down.
You're also ignoring the war in the pacific and how that tied up the Allies, particularly the US and DUKE forces.
Yes, the Soviets suffered massive casualties. That has a lot to do with Soviet human wave attacks, an absolutely insane lack of planning and non existent logistics, and the shit build quality of just about everything the Soviets produced domestically.
Dates help clarify:
Germany invaded the Soviet Union ("Barbarossa") on June 22, 1941.
The Japanese bomb Pearl harbor Hawaii on December 7th, 1941. America declares war on Nazi Germany the next day.
The Allies invaded Western Europe starting June 6, 1944.
Even from a simple timeline like this it is impossible to say that the allies tied up the Germans in Western Europe to allow the Soviets to rally.
The story of world war II is the exact opposite. The Soviets fought against the Germans, while the Western allies took years to organize an invasion on their side of the continent. These are incontrovertible facts that are well known and well understood and well documented.
Not really. The current Russian government policy is Russia won the war all by itself. They sacrificed more, so they did all the fighting. Any deviation from the official policy will end you up in prison.
They sacrificed more because they had poor quality troops, bad commanders, tactics, and strategies that amounted to "we have reserves", and shit equipment. Plus they had no problem starving or massacring their own civilians as long as they were lesser Soviets and not Russians.
WWII isn't a series of disconnected battles and theaters of operations. What was happening in the Pacific, in Burma, in China, effected what was going on in Europe and Russia. The Battle of Britian shattered the Luftwaffe. It never recovered, especially from the loss of pilots. To claim that did nothing to drain German resources is laughable. Every foot of ground Germany lost in Africa, southern Europe, northern Europe, and everywhere else they conquered drained resources if for no other reason than the Nazis couldn't steal them anymore.
Claiming the Soviets did it on their own is as wrong as claiming the Americans or the British did it all on their own.
You may have confused the words policy and historical interpretation. The two are not the same. And regardless, the the current Russian regime may have an inaccurate historical interpretation of the second world war, but that fact does not make the statement in the wonkette article accurate.
The reality remains that the wonkette article claims that the Allies tied up German military resources in Western Europe, giving the Soviets time to rally. You bring in the Pacific theater and all this other stuff, which has some validity to it, but that does not appear in the clear declarative statement made in the wonkette article.
We are not debating historical interpretations of the Russian regime. Although that was the impetus for the historically inaccurate comment made in the article.
Again, the article claims that the Western allies should get credit for tying up German military resources in Western Europe, the place specified in the line in the article, which then gave time and space for the Soviets to rally. That's the full extent of what we're discussing here.
My accusation was that that claim in the article, that specific one, with all the words in that claim and no more to be added, is just damn wrong. And anyone with a clear understanding of the sequence of events in Western Europe between 1939 and 1945 agrees.
We, from the guy who dodged.
And called them all suckers and losers.
I don't wish to see a violent uprising during Donnie's Big Dick Waxing Hullabaloo; I just want him to fear one every minute the soldiers march by.
Trump is not a very intelligent man and almost a functional illiterate. Nothing he says surprises me. That idiotic TV show forced his made up character as a brilliant businessman on the American public. Unfortunately, that is the only Donald Trump most people knew when he entered politics. Those of us who knew the REAL Donald Trump were screaming the warnings to the rafters., Not enough people were willing to listen. The REAL Donald Trump is more like the characters in "Tin Men" Old school high pressure bullshit artist
My mom was a kid in Northern Ireland during World War II. I can't imagine Trump's "we did it all, we did more than anybody!" is going down well in the UK or in any European country where the war was actually happening.
I was a kid in Scotland during World War II. The "we did it all..." is definitely not going down well in this Florida house.
And, which "we" was he referring to? 'Cause he constantly refers to himself using the king's royal "We."