You really have to ask the obvious question:  Since when do sovereign nations allow adversaries to dictate to them how they will handle their international relationships and alliances?/

How is it acceptable for Putin to dictate to any nation, including Ukraine, whether or not they can join NATO?

Best thing Trump can do is facilitate NATO's admission of Ukraine as a member, then tell Putin he has 3 weeks to withdraw his troops from the country before the entire NATO alliance comes to Ukraine's defense.

Will that start WWIII?  Not if Putin has any commons sense.  Look at the list of NATO members again, and see what Putin sees.  Our biggest hurdle is if China decides to get involved on Russia's behalf.  I don't see them doing that.

The US empire does things of this nature to keep its vassal states in-line all the time.

Makes no sense. 
I asked "Since when do sovereign nations allow adversaries to dictate to them how they will handle their international relationships and alliances?
Your reply is in the context of nations already allied with the US, not adversaries being told how to form alliances

Did everyone forget the blowing up of the Nord Stream pipeline after Biden made clear that pipeline will come to an end in the months prior; thereby, ensuring all economic ties between the EU and Russia were severed?

Was the EU ever consulted before the Nord Stream Pipeline's destruction plans were made?

Why do you think Russia would ever consult  the EU before sabotaging the pipeline?  There's been no conclusive evidence as to who was responsible, but after multiple investigations by many nations, the best guess is Russia did it.  Russian subs and supply ships were reported in the area within the week leading up to the explosions.
 No other vessels capable of carrying the materials used were in the area.

If you do not find it acceptable for Russia demanding Ukraine not join NATO, how can you on the other hand find it acceptable for the US empire to assist in the overthrow and later illegally annex the Hawaiian Kingdom against the will of its leadership and people?

Why are you making an assumption that I find it acceptable for the US to "assist" in the overthrow and annexation of Hawaii? 
Even if I did find it acceptable, it's apples and oranges.  The US didn't invade Hawaii causing over 1 million casualties, the complete destruction of 6 cities and displacing 3.7 million refugees.


Trump is not a warmonger and everything he has stated to this point regarding Ukraine is an end to hostilities.


Since Russia has been fighting not just Ukrainians but hired mercenaries and former soldiers from the US empire and NATO members already, do you really think Putin and the people of the Russian Federation are afraid of what Trump does?  If anything, American snowflakes, soy boys, and gender fluid biological males should be afraid of the possibility of getting drafted to fight the battle-hardened Russians in Ukraine.

Moreover, with China knowing full well that the US empire is preparing for proxy wars against its nation via a potential Taiwan independence declaration and/or the South China Sea disputes with the Philippines, it should come to no surprise if China decides to directly or indirectly support the Russian Federation against any war from the US empire and its vassal states.

I never said Putin was "afraid of what Trump does."  I said he respects Trump.  That's a valuable thing when Trump begins negotiating for peace.  Putin will be more likely to accept terms coming from Trump than from Harris, and Biden apparently would rather keep funding the death cycle of all out war than try negotiating.

China is going to sit on the sidelines strengthening their economic position to be better prepared to go after Taiwan.  They have no real benefit from supporting Russia on the other side of the world, especially since Russia is wasting so much wealth to attains such little land.

I asked "Since when do sovereign nations allow adversaries to dictate to them how they will handle their international relationships and alliances?
Your reply is in the context of nations already allied with the US, not adversaries being told how to form alliances.

Why do you think Russia would ever consult the EU before sabotaging the pipeline?  There's been no conclusive evidence as to who was responsible, but after multiple investigations by many nations, the best guess is Russia did it.  Russian subs and supply ships were reported in the area within the week leading up to the explosions.
 No other vessels capable of carrying the materials used were in the area.

Why are you making an assumption that I find it acceptable for the US to "assist" in the overthrow and annexation of Hawaii?
Even if I did find it acceptable, it's apples and oranges.  The US didn't invade Hawaii causing over 1 million casualties, the complete destruction of 6 cities and displacing 3.7 million refugees.

I never said Putin was "afraid of what Trump does."  I said he respects Trump.  That's a valuable thing when Trump begins negotiating for peace.  Putin will be more likely to accept terms coming from Trump than from Harris, and Biden apparently would rather keep funding the death cycle of all out war than try negotiating.

Oh really?

Just this morning, it has been revealed by Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-ordered-tsmc-halt-shipments-china-chips-used-ai-applications-source-says-2024-11-10/) that the US empire using their lame duck senile of fool mouthpiece just ordered the Republic of China to stop shipping advanced chips used in artificial intelligence applications to customers in China; thereby, dictating to Taiwan who they can sell their domestic products to.  If that is not interfering with a sovereign nation's economic relationships, I don't know what it.

Once again, not the same thing.  Do you really have to be right even though you know you're wrong?  Show me an example where the US told China, N. Korea, Russia, or any other adversary they need to avoid or severe alliances with any other nation, or we won't play with them.


US ordered TSMC to halt shipments to China of chips used in AI applications
By Karen Freifeld and Fanny Potkin
November 9, 2024, 7:12 PM HST, Updated 13 hours ago

NEW YORK/SINGAPORE, Nov 9 (Reuters) - The U.S. ordered Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (2330.TW), opens new tab to halt shipments of advanced chips to Chinese customers that are often used in artificial intelligence applications starting Monday, according to a person familiar with the matter.

[snip]


Question: What does Russia to gain by blowing up its own pipeline to the EU and cut off a substantial source of revenue?
Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.  WRONG.  it gives them an excuse to start a war.

Question: What does the US empire gain by blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline, never mind that Biden himself said the US empire was going to end it?
Answer: Severing much needed natural gas revenue to Russia and making the EU dependent on way more expensive natural gas from the US empire. How much natural gas does the EU buy from the US as a percentage of all their natural gas demand?  ANSWER:  ZERO -- keep reading ...

Quote

“The EU doesn't buy LNG — there's a global LNG market and LNG buyers have
their own contracts,” he said. “It's certainly possible to do a memorandum of
understanding to talk about increasing purchases but ultimately in the past that's
been a way to put a political wrapper around something that was delivered by the
market. And the EU is buying as much LNG currently as the market needs.”

https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-european-union-gas-lng-united-states-export-tariffs-trade-election-biden-harris/

First of all, I don't see you as one that supports the restoration of the Hawaiian nation state.  I'm not a "Hawaiian" as defined by locals.  I'm a Hawaiian in that I live in this state, just as anyone living in New York is a New Yorker no matter where they were born.  The state is ... well ... a US State.  I don't think states have the legal right to secede from the US -- a fact that was demonstrated by the Civil War.  However, some legal scholars believe secession is legal, butt the problem becomes whether the state can withstand a federal government that can bring economic and military force to bear on the state.  Regardless, HI is now conditioned to enjoy the benefits of statehood.  Good luck trying to restore a kingdom that was too weak to prevent US annexation in the first place.

Second, just because the US empire's illegal overthrow and annexation of Hawaii did not cause the same level of destruction as seen in the Ukrainian War that makes the current illegal occupation of Hawaii morally right to you?  Yes.  The level of force in Ukraine is unjustified, considering Ukraine didn't invade Russia.  In Hawaii, what makes it moral is that the islands were already a US territory.  There was a legitimate reason to make the islands a state, especially when it could be done without bloodshed.
 Given the history of the world and the means used in the acquisition of lands, I'd say the way the US went about it was less immoral than most.


Your statement presumes that it will be Trump that will be dictating terms for Putin to accept.  That's not how negotiations work.  Trump will make offers, decline counter offers, etc.  When they reach a deal both sides can accept, there will be peace.  Seriously, your word choices are very tiring.  i think you know better, but you choose words like 'dictate' to purposely paint a different narrative than what exists in reality.

With the blood the Russian Federation has spilled as a direct result of the US empire's proxy war against it, it is more likely what Trump will concede to Russia for the Ukrainian War to end.  More inflammatory rhetoric.  The US did not force Russia to start killing Ukrainians.  Stop with the proxy war BS.  Trump hasn't got the authority to concede anything in Ukraine to  Russia,  what he does have is the economic and military strength to make life even more difficult for Russia, a nation using their resources to fight a massive war.  They are already placing a strain on their country.  More pressure applied in the right areas would make the gain no longer worth the pain.

Once again, not the same thing.  Do you really have to be right even though you know you're wrong?  Show me an example where the US told China, N. Korea, Russia, or any other adversary they need to avoid or severe alliances with any other nation, or we won't play with them.

WRONG.  it gives them an excuse to start a war.

I'm not a "Hawaiian" as defined by locals.  I'm a Hawaiian in that I live in this state, just as anyone living in New York is a New Yorker no matter where they were born.  The state is ... well ... a US State.  I don't think states have the legal right to secede from the US -- a fact that was demonstrated by the Civil War.  However, some legal scholars believe secession is legal, butt the problem becomes whether the state can withstand a federal government that can bring economic and military force to bear on the state.  Regardless, HI is now conditioned to enjoy the benefits of statehood.  Good luck trying to restore a kingdom that was too weak to prevent US annexation in the first place.

Yes.  The level of force in Ukraine is unjustified, considering Ukraine didn't invade Russia.  In Hawaii, what makes it moral is that the islands were already a US territory.  There was a legitimate reason to make the islands a state, especially when it could be done without bloodshed.
Given the history of the world and the means used in the acquisition of lands, I'd say the way the US went about it was less immoral than most.

More inflammatory rhetoric.  The US did not force Russia to start killing Ukrainians.  Stop with the proxy war BS.  Trump hasn't got the authority to concede anything in Ukraine to  Russia,  what he does have is the economic and military strength to make life even more difficult for Russia, a nation using their resources to fight a massive war.  They are already placing a strain on their country.  More pressure applied in the right areas would make the gain no longer worth the pain.

Enjoy
......

We stopped calling American Indians that because "Indian" was already taken by India, and it confuses people.  The name was erroneously coined by Columbus, I believe.  He believed he had landed in Southeast Asia as he was seeking trade routes to there, and he decided the people he found were actually Indians.  It took until the 1970s to start correcting that mistake.

https://www.historicalindex.org/why-are-native-americans-called-indians.htm

We stopped calling American Indians that because "Indian" was already taken by India, and it confuses people.  The name was erroneously coined by Columbus, I believe.  He believed he had landed in Southeast Asia as he was seeking trade routes to there, and he decided the people he found were actually Indians.  It took until the 1970s to start correcting that mistake.

https://www.historicalindex.org/why-are-native-americans-called-indians.htm

Are you telling me (us) that Biden did the best job with the Russia-Ukraine war, and Harris would have also done the best job?  Trump will be worse than either of them?

It's not an essay question.  Either you think Trump will be better for the situation or worse.

Care to give a one sentence answer?

Trump is not a warmonger and is the right person to lend assistance to end hostilities in Ukraine.

However, until his selections for Secretary of the State, Secretary of Defense, and his national security adviser are made official, it is only at that time we will know if Trump is truly a man who wants peace, or another stooge placed in the White House to rubber stamp the US empire's march to WWIII.

Trump is not a warmonger and is the right person to lend assistance to end hostilities in Ukraine.

However, until his selections for Secretary of the State, Secretary of Defense, and his national security adviser are made official, it is only at that time we will know if Trump is truly a man who wants peace, or another stooge placed in the White House to rubber stamp the US empire's march to WWIII.

Ur stacking the deck on Trump. What you're saying is if Trump does nothing as in the war continues, does he truely want peace?. Remember, Putin didn't invade when Trump was POTUS. He waited.

Since we are talking about the potential of WWIII, if Trump selects known neocons and/or Russia/China/Iran/DPRK Warhawks to the most strategic roles of his executive cabinet, then yes, he does not truly want peace.

Putin did not invade Ukraine during Trump's first term in office not because he was afraid of him, but had hopes Trump would be willing to negotiate a deal to peacefully address Russian strategic concerns regarding Ukraine.

Since we are talking about the potential of WWIII, if Trump selects known neocons and/or Russia/China/Iran/DPRK Warhawks to the most strategic roles of his executive cabinet, then yes, he does not truly want peace.

Putin did not invade Ukraine during Trump's first term in office not because he was afraid of him, but had hopes Trump would be willing to negotiate a deal to peacefully address Russian strategic concerns regarding Ukraine.

I think YOU were talking about a possible WWIII in the future.  I was talking about the Russia-Ukraine war that's going on today.

I think he's going to make excellent choices.

In regard to the US proxy war in Ukraine where the US empire is providing money, material, military advisors as well as indirectly channeling hired mercenaries from all corners of its empire and vassal states to Ukraine, how can the Russians as well as many all over the World not view this as or at the very least the opening stages of WWIII?

Because it's no different than the Cuban Missile Crisis, The Bay of Pigs attack, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom, Afghanistan, Syria, and lately the Iranian assassination plans against Trump.  EVERY one of these types of events are viewed as the opening stages of WWIII, yet we have been able to avoid it.  I don't think I, nor the "many all over the world" are any more worried about WWIII at this stage than they have been in the past.

With neocons/China Hawks/Zionists Rubio, Waltz, Stefanik already announced to be part of Trump's cabinet, it appears the US empire could potentially be involved in a greater war in the Middle East against Iran as well as proxy war against China via the Philippines and/or Taiwan.

As opposed to whom?  If we continue to show weakness and capitulation in the face of direct and covert attack on our military, leadership and civilians, we INVITE further attacks through our weak responses.  When asked what his message to Iran would be regarding them attacking Israel, Biden said, "Don't."   Wow!  Such a harsh warning.

Furthermore, with such pro-war individuals and potentially others surrounding Trump in the White House, how can Trump even end the Ukrainian War?

Purely rhetorical.  Assumes actions not yet demonstrated, since those people have yet to assume their new roles.

Because it's no different than the Cuban Missile Crisis, The Bay of Pigs attack, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom, Afghanistan, Syria, and lately the Iranian assassination plans against Trump.  EVERY one of these types of events are viewed as the opening stages of WWIII, yet we have been able to avoid it.  I don't think I, nor the "many all over the world" are any more worried about WWIII at this stage than they have been in the past.

As opposed to whom?  If we continue to show weakness and capitulation in the face of direct and covert attack on our military, leadership and civilians, we INVITE further attacks through our weak responses.  When asked what his message to Iran would be regarding them attacking Israel, Biden said, "Don't."   Wow!  Such a harsh warning.

The only difference is that Americans whether mercenary, clandestine CIA, etc. are directly fighting the Russians and even taking part of invading Russia itself via Kursk.


Risk further attacks from whom to where?  Israel?

As much as all the so-called elected stooges swear their support of Israel, the US empire does have a number of assistance related agreements, but it does not have an offically military alliance with Israel.  Hence, it is not the responsibility of the US empire to fight, dissuade, etc. any nation that Israel has issues with.

Iran’s unprecedented attack on Israel early Sunday marked a change in approach
for Tehran, which had relied on proxies across the Middle East since the start of
the Israel-Hamas war in October.

All eyes are now on whether Israel chooses to take further military action, while
Washington seeks diplomatic measures instead to ease regional tensions.

The only difference is that Americans whether mercenary, clandestine CIA, etc. are directly fighting the Russians and even taking part of invading Russia itself via Kursk.

The US has spooks or spies in every country doing  forms of "attacking".  So do other countries as well.