Comments on: Ukraine Updates- Pax Americana fully participant

By: penny2

penny2 — Tue, 25 Feb 2025 14:26:32 +0000

I’m aware of who Robert Barnes and have listened from time to time to his podcasts.

I hope your correct Gary about Trump. I covered his first presidency. He attacked Syria. Armed Ukrainians. Killed the Iranian General etc., He carried on the policy of his predecessor. Admittedly, it’s still early days in the Trump admin.
That said the American agenda is, in my opinion, vastly larger than any one President- regardless of President or party. That is usually what I follow the agenda rather than the politician, for that reason.

Time will tell

By: Gary Wilson

Gary Wilson — Mon, 24 Feb 2025 22:19:24 +0000

Hi Penny:
In his first run as president, I think Trump made poor choices for the people under him, including his vice president. When Trump, as president, was unable to deal with the deep state, I think the deep state became over confident that they could always easily handle Trump. The lawyer, Robert Barnes, whom I followed at the time, suggested Trump might benefit by not winning his reelection and by running again four years later. This seems to have been a good prediction by Robert Barnes. This time Trump’s election is demonstrating to me that he is much better prepared and the deep state has been totally caught off guard and they are now running around in chaos tearing their hair out (if they are not bald).

By: penny2

penny2 — Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:48:28 +0000

apparently sending MORE Canadian troops is on the table

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/trudeau-in-kyiv-pledges-army-vehicles-seized-russian-cash-on-anniversary-of-invasion/

Justin Trudeau did not rule out sending Canadian troops to Ukraine

Trudeau said Canada will continue training Ukrainian troops so that Russia will not be allowed to *end the world order* that upheld sovereignty for many countries for decades.

END THE WORLD ORDER= PAX AMERICANA

By: penny2

penny2 — Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:34:40 +0000

In reply to Kaz.

I think taking the mineral deal will be a set up for plunder by the US. With little to no real security supports. I’m also certain once plundered the environmental destruction will be left for the Ukrainians to clean up- If anyone is left, after the Ukrainians keep fighting? And why fight for the demise of their nation?
By that I mean, right now the minerals are Ukraine’s they could finance a rebuilding, but, after this deal- profits will go elsewhere, Ukrainians will continue dying.

So I agree with this “But if they accept it anyway it will probably be something in the line of exploit and not follow up on the promises.”

Also agree with “And create a narrative that the Putin was right along and because even bigger divisions in Eastern Europe. ”

Because inevitably he will have been shown to be correct.
It’s sad, no it’s tragic

By: Kaz

Kaz — Mon, 24 Feb 2025 15:07:49 +0000

Whatever path is taken here I don’t see a way for Russia to lose.

Either choices will screw up Ukraine. The Mineral choice might be the most dangerous one since depending on how they follow it up(Which there is no example they have ever done it properly), it can cause the feeling of betrayal to manifest. And create a narrative that the Putin was right along and because even bigger divisions in Eastern Europe.

When I heard the offer, what went through my mind is. An offer which is made not to be accepted, but refused. But if they accept it anyway it will probably be something in the line of exploit and not follow up on the promises.