Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I will actually put a positive spin on the Trump-Putin meeting. As I often say at work, no deal is better than a bad deal.
Let's give Chamberlain his fair respect. When he became PM in May 1937, Chamberlain inherited a military neglected by PMs Stanley Baldwin (1923-29 & 1935-37) and Ramsey MacDonald (1924, 1929-35). He was no fool when he signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, as he knew Britain was not ready. But Chamberlain set to work, leading one of the largest rearmament campaigns of all time (Putin will have a equally massive postwar task rearming Russia), launching or laying down seven fleet carriers (Ark Royal, 6xIllustrious/Implacable class) and all five KGV class battleships. Chamberlain's government expedited the Spitfire, Hurricane and chain home radar programs that made Churchill's victory in the BoB possible. I've always thought that Chamberlain is unfairly tarred by us armchair historians. Chamberlain is no Trump.It's a pity that the USA seems to be determined to do their version of Chamberlain's "peace for our time". It's a shame that nobody learns from mistakes in the past.
More prosaically, the reaction of Edouard Daladier, French President of the Council of Ministers (Prime Minister), upon seeing the crowd cheer him on the Munich return by plane was to say : " les cons " (the jerks).Let's give Chamberlain his fair respect. When he became PM in May 1937, Chamberlain inherited a military neglected by PMs Stanley Baldwin (1923-29 & 1935-37) and Ramsey MacDonald (1924, 1929-35). He was no fool when he signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, as he knew Britain was not ready. But Chamberlain set to work, leading one of the largest rearmament campaigns of all time (Putin will have a equally massive postwar task rearming Russia), launching or laying down seven fleet carriers (Ark Royal, 6xIllustrious/Implacable class) and all five KGV class battleships. Chamberlain's government expedited the Spitfire, Hurricane and chain home radar programs that made Churchill's victory in the BoB possible. I've always thought that Chamberlain is unfairly tarred by us armchair historians. Had be not died at age 71 in Nov 1940, but lived to see the end of the war it would have been interesting to read his take on events.
Russia gloats over Putin-Trump summit
The Alaska meeting provided a propaganda triumph for Russia and its leader, including Trump applauding the Kremlin chief and giving him a ride in his presidential limousine.www.politico.eu
I agree. My point was more that any so-called "deal" would not have been a real deal since Zelenskyy was not part of the discussions. The risk though was that Trump would claim it was a deal and then Zelenskyy would be 'wedged between Trump and Putin, and when they don't accept it would be claimed that they weren't interested in peace. Hence my comment that "no deal was better than a bad deal".As much as I appreciate positivity, the odds of any deal happening without Zelenskyy present were virtually nil, especially when Putin himself doesn't want a deal. He wants an abject surrender. A diktat is not a deal.
I agree. Chamberlain was both buying time for rearming and was also of the generation that had gone through the devastation of WW1 only 20 odd years earlier. thus would have wanted to avoid that.Let's give Chamberlain his fair respect. When he became PM in May 1937, Chamberlain inherited a military neglected by PMs Stanley Baldwin (1923-29 & 1935-37) and Ramsey MacDonald (1924, 1929-35). He was no fool when he signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, as he knew Britain was not ready. But Chamberlain set to work, leading one of the largest rearmament campaigns of all time (Putin will have a equally massive postwar task rearming Russia), launching or laying down seven fleet carriers (Ark Royal, 6xIllustrious/Implacable class) and all five KGV class battleships. Chamberlain's government expedited the Spitfire, Hurricane and chain home radar programs that made Churchill's victory in the BoB possible. I've always thought that Chamberlain is unfairly tarred by us armchair historians. Chamberlain is no Trump.
Ukraine needs to fight on for at least another four years in the hope that the mood and vision at the White House changes to its benefit. That is Ukraine's only hope. Ideally Ukraine's ever growing fleet of advanced drones will reduce its own casualties, as Ukraine cannot bleed its population for ever.
I agree. My point was more that any so-called "deal" would not have been a real deal since Zelenskyy was not part of the discussions. The risk though was that Trump would claim it was a deal and then Zelenskyy would be 'wedged between Trump and Putin, and when they don't accept it would be claimed that they weren't interested in peace. Hence my comment that "no deal was better than a bad deal".
Well said. I have often thought that Chamberlain has been treated generally unfairly. Did he boldly launch a principled assault on Nazi Germany? Well, no. But he did do a LOT to ensure that Britain had a lot of the tools needed to win the war, when it finally did kick off.Let's give Chamberlain his fair respect. When he became PM in May 1937, Chamberlain inherited a military neglected by PMs Stanley Baldwin (1923-29 & 1935-37) and Ramsey MacDonald (1924, 1929-35). He was no fool when he signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, as he knew Britain was not ready. But Chamberlain set to work, leading one of the largest rearmament campaigns of all time (Putin will have a equally massive postwar task rearming Russia), launching or laying down seven fleet carriers (Ark Royal, 6xIllustrious/Implacable class) and all five KGV class battleships. Chamberlain's government expedited the Spitfire, Hurricane and chain home radar programs that made Churchill's victory in the BoB possible. I've always thought that Chamberlain is unfairly tarred by us armchair historians. Chamberlain is no Trump.
Well said. I have often thought that Chamberlain has been treated generally unfairly. Did he boldly launch a principled assault on Nazi Germany? Well, no. But he did do a LOT to ensure that Britain had a lot of the tools needed to win the war, when it finally did kick off.
Yes, Chamberlain was desperately trying to buy time, as you mentioned. The current USA faces no such pressuresThe thing is, the comparison between Trump and Chamberlain is inapt precisely, as you and A Admiral Beez point out, Chamberlain was operating from the back foot and trying to catch up to a Germany already well into the swing of not only rearming, but bullying. Not only that, the disparity between the economic presence of Russia v America on the world stage is much, much larger in our favor than even the Brits held over Nazi Germany -- which was itself substantial.
In contrast, Trump is sitting in a position of strength. Even without the war in Ukraine, all branches of the US military sit in a better position both in terms of materiel and quality of troop. The US economy, while not great, is head-and-shoulders above a nominally-smaller Russian economy that is already suffering the strains of war. Trump also doesn't have to fight Treasury to rapidly rearm ... but still he caves.
We can disagree about Chamberlain (and I suspect we do, big deal), but Trump caved from a much stronger position, so far as I see it.
To reiterate, this is only my opinion and I welcome disagreement and differing views. I hope the brain-trust here can and will pick apart the significance of this. I suspect it has more importance than just a photo-op flyover, myself. I think a historical moment happened, and not good.
Yes, Chamberlain was desperately trying to buy time, as you mentioned. The current USA faces no such pressures
I'm still baffled by the lack of any action on the "ceasefire in 10-12 days" threat from a couple of weeks ago.
Let's not start a discussion about Chamberlain and his intentions here, we can do that somewhere else on the forum if necessary.Let's give Chamberlain his fair respect. When he became PM in May 1937, Chamberlain inherited a military neglected by PMs Stanley Baldwin (1923-29 & 1935-37) and Ramsey MacDonald (1924, 1929-35). He was no fool when he signed the Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938, as he knew Britain was not ready. But Chamberlain set to work, leading one of the largest rearmament campaigns of all time (Putin will have a equally massive postwar task rearming Russia), launching or laying down seven fleet carriers (Ark Royal, 6xIllustrious/Implacable class) and all five KGV class battleships. Chamberlain's government expedited the Spitfire, Hurricane and chain home radar programs that made Churchill's victory in the BoB possible. I've always thought that Chamberlain is unfairly tarred by us armchair historians. Chamberlain is no Trump.
Let's not start a discussion about Chamberlain and his intentions here, we can do that somewhere else on the forum if necessary.
My point here is thee the at like Chamberlain, the USA is very eager to trade someone else 's land for a fake peace. Regardless of Chamberlain's real intentions, we all know the result of that then. It encouraged Hitler in his stride to grab more land and accelerate the start of WW2.
So giving away Ukraine's land will only encourage Putin as well. He will get a reward for his unforgivable aggression and who knows what he's going to do next.