5 ms·

I'm not buying the idea that Trump is just an unknown. He has talked with Putin multiple times without aides, he has many business ties with Russia. The bi-part

I'm not buying the idea that Trump is just an unknown. He has talked with Putin multiple times without aides, he has many business ties with Russia. The bi-partisan senate report pretty much proves that this isn't just chance. Russia isn't in a position of power. Any amount of generated chaos is a positive - the proxy war in the middle east is irrelevant to Europe - Putin would make that trade any day of the week. Russia isn't directly supporting only Trump - it's likely they are supporting left wing candidates as well. It isn't for "policy" it's for division and sowing chaos. The US is its own worst enemy right now - and that limits it internationally.

luckylion 6y ago
So it's "Russia is controlling Trump" after all! That would make it more dependable, at least if it's the president that runs the course, and not primarily a giant apparatus of employees, lobbyists and bureaucrats. That kind of unlikely, as presidents have changed while policy by and large remains the same. If it's indeed the establishment that carries the power, and you're trying to install your obvious puppet as president, wouldn't that make it extremely risky? > Any amount of generated chaos is a positive - the proxy war in the middle east is irrelevant to Europe - Putin would make that trade any day of the week. And lose their Mediterranean naval base (the only one they have that's not in or right next to Russia, depending on how you view Crimea) and their influence in the region? Hard to believe, especially for a guy like Putin that strikes me as chess player rather than an emotional brawler without long-term plans. Sowing chaos is what I meant: rolling the dice. Might turn out great, might be your downfall. Doesn't sound like a KGB agent to me.
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  You seem to be missing the third option - the enemy of my enemy is my friend. There doesn't have to be "control." Simply agreement in which action to take. You're arguing with yourself. You assume that he is either controlled or not - but you never consider the fact that they may be allies.

luckylion 6y ago

So it's "Russia is controlling Trump" after all! That would make it more dependable, at least if it's the president that runs the course, and not primarily a giant apparatus of employees, lobbyists and bureaucrats. That kind of unlikely, as presidents have changed while policy by and large remains the same. If it's indeed the establishment that carries the power, and you're trying to install your obvious puppet as president, wouldn't that make it extremely risky? > Any amount of generated chaos is a positive - the proxy war in the middle east is irrelevant to Europe - Putin would make that trade any day of the week. And lose their Mediterranean naval base (the only one they have that's not in or right next to Russia, depending on how you view Crimea) and their influence in the region? Hard to believe, especially for a guy like Putin that strikes me as chess player rather than an emotional brawler without long-term plans. Sowing chaos is what I meant: rolling the dice. Might turn out great, might be your downfall. Doesn't sound like a KGB agent to me.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago
You seem to be missing the third option - the enemy of my enemy is my friend. There doesn't have to be "control." Simply agreement in which action to take. You're arguing with yourself. You assume that he is either controlled or not - but you never consider the fact that they may be allies.