4 ms·

Honestly, if Trump keeps giving intelligence to Ukraine against Russia, then it was worth paying the (idiotic) tariffs. That was the EUs top priority. The othe

Honestly, if Trump keeps giving intelligence to Ukraine against Russia, then it was worth paying the (idiotic) tariffs. That was the EUs top priority. The other issue was that each country had its own products they didn't want to lose sales from. More generally, the EU isn't built for a world of presidential powers exercised at whom, which is becoming more of an issue this decade.

lokar 2mo ago
There some sense that the structure of the EU is predicated on a stable rules based international order.
- bawolff 2mo ago
  I dont think this is true. I imagine the designers of the EU were fully aware that foreign govs might renege on deals and built mechanisms to deal with that. For the most part, the rules based international order is built around the idea that following it is in everyone's best interest and going against it will have negative consequences. That is why it has lasted so long.
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    Huh? There has never been a rules based international order, only the superficial appearance of one.
    - bawolff 2mo ago
      Yes, that is what people mean by a rules based international order. Its not literally followed rigidly, but there are certain norms that are followed 90% of the time, and that makes things more predictable which is a good thing. How often are diplomats executed to send a message to there home country? Basically never. That is the system. Its far from perfect, definitely not comprehensive, but does do some good every now and then.
      - inigyou 2mo ago
        To repeat myself: that doesn't exist. Only the appearance of it.
        womble2 2mo ago
        So you think diplomats are executed to send a message, there is just the appearance of them not being? Again, what is meant by a rule based order is not that there are solid rules upheld consistently as in criminal law, just that there are norms which are usually obeyed.
foogazi 2mo ago
> Honestly, if Trump keeps giving intelligence to Ukraine against Russia, then it was worth paying the (idiotic) tariffs. But you already had that - this tariffs “deal” was just extortion, adding a tax for nothing
- layer8 2mo ago
  Trump stopped intelligence sharing on Russia with Ukraine in spring last year while tariff negotiations with the EU were ongoing.
  - foogazi 2mo ago
    That’s what I mean Why did intel sharing stop ? To extract more from the EU: extortion
    - layer8 2mo ago
      Certainly it is. But when the choice is between having the tariffs and Ukraine losing the war, the former is still preferable. Of course it’s not such a simple binary choice, but it is a weighing of options and their likely consequences. In that sense some choices are more worthwhile than others, even when they involve concessions to a bully.
      - don_esteban 2mo ago
        There is no choice. The Ukraine is bleeding and getting destroyed, day by day. And things are getting worse, by Russian reciprocal responses, for every escalation success Ukraine has achieved. Recent examples: Attack ships in Azov sea -> Odessa ports essentially blocked, attack Russian warehouses -> your warehouses are getting destroyed. What path of victory do you see enabled by US (or EU, for that matter) actions? It is just prolonging the war, by giving the Ukraine (and gullible western audience) an illusion that Ukraine can win it. > In that sense some choices are more worthwhile than others, even when they involve concessions to a bully. So, despite recent Gallup poll showing that majority of Ukrainians are for negotiated end of the conflict a.s.a.p. https://news.gallup.com/poll/711992/ukrainians-sour-washington-views-war-stabilize.aspx?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://news.gallup.com/poll/711992/ukrainians-sour-washingt..., it is worthwhile for European powers to give concessions to Trump, to achieve what? To bleed Russia more and hope that it somehow collapses (or suddenly decides to give up)? Despite the very real (bloody!) costs to Ukraine?

lokar 2mo ago

There some sense that the structure of the EU is predicated on a stable rules based international order.

bawolff 2mo ago
I dont think this is true. I imagine the designers of the EU were fully aware that foreign govs might renege on deals and built mechanisms to deal with that. For the most part, the rules based international order is built around the idea that following it is in everyone's best interest and going against it will have negative consequences. That is why it has lasted so long.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  Huh? There has never been a rules based international order, only the superficial appearance of one.
  - bawolff 2mo ago
    Yes, that is what people mean by a rules based international order. Its not literally followed rigidly, but there are certain norms that are followed 90% of the time, and that makes things more predictable which is a good thing. How often are diplomats executed to send a message to there home country? Basically never. That is the system. Its far from perfect, definitely not comprehensive, but does do some good every now and then.
    - inigyou 2mo ago
      To repeat myself: that doesn't exist. Only the appearance of it.
      - womble2 2mo ago
        So you think diplomats are executed to send a message, there is just the appearance of them not being? Again, what is meant by a rule based order is not that there are solid rules upheld consistently as in criminal law, just that there are norms which are usually obeyed.

foogazi 2mo ago

> Honestly, if Trump keeps giving intelligence to Ukraine against Russia, then it was worth paying the (idiotic) tariffs. But you already had that - this tariffs “deal” was just extortion, adding a tax for nothing

layer8 2mo ago
Trump stopped intelligence sharing on Russia with Ukraine in spring last year while tariff negotiations with the EU were ongoing.
- foogazi 2mo ago
  That’s what I mean Why did intel sharing stop ? To extract more from the EU: extortion
  - layer8 2mo ago
    Certainly it is. But when the choice is between having the tariffs and Ukraine losing the war, the former is still preferable. Of course it’s not such a simple binary choice, but it is a weighing of options and their likely consequences. In that sense some choices are more worthwhile than others, even when they involve concessions to a bully.
    - don_esteban 2mo ago
      There is no choice. The Ukraine is bleeding and getting destroyed, day by day. And things are getting worse, by Russian reciprocal responses, for every escalation success Ukraine has achieved. Recent examples: Attack ships in Azov sea -> Odessa ports essentially blocked, attack Russian warehouses -> your warehouses are getting destroyed. What path of victory do you see enabled by US (or EU, for that matter) actions? It is just prolonging the war, by giving the Ukraine (and gullible western audience) an illusion that Ukraine can win it. > In that sense some choices are more worthwhile than others, even when they involve concessions to a bully. So, despite recent Gallup poll showing that majority of Ukrainians are for negotiated end of the conflict a.s.a.p. https://news.gallup.com/poll/711992/ukrainians-sour-washington-views-war-stabilize.aspx?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://news.gallup.com/poll/711992/ukrainians-sour-washingt..., it is worthwhile for European powers to give concessions to Trump, to achieve what? To bleed Russia more and hope that it somehow collapses (or suddenly decides to give up)? Despite the very real (bloody!) costs to Ukraine?