Ok, not football at all, but it matters, eventually.

[spaldy]

So, we get Robert F Kennedy Jr nominated as health secretary with zero previous experience in that field, and a chap who is under investigation for child *** trafficking as Attorney General. Only in America.

We have our "issues, but nevertheless I hope you transatlantic dudes are proud of your "democracy".

Seriously???

Have you looked at the current administration? Do me a favor and take a couple of minutes and look at them and their credentials as well as what they think is important. Forget your hatred of Trump and look at his appointees vs the current occupant that position.

Any who advocates for healthier food, exercise for young students (they get none now at school), research into the **** they shoot into our arms without any certification from the FDA (the covid vaccine is still not approved by them), not allowing children under 18 to take life altering puberty blockers and chemical castration drugs then they get my support regardless of who appointed them. Frankly, they should get yours as well.

[spaldy]

I"m assuming that you also believe that Trump was blackmailed with evidence that he paid russian hookers to urinate on him as well. It's obviously true since the CIA, FBI and DOJ all had high ranking officials that stated it in a letter and under oath.

[WTF11]

Seriously???

Have you looked at the current administration? Do me a favor and take a couple of minutes and look at them and their credentials as well as what they think is important. Forget your hatred of Trump and look at his appointees vs the current occupant that position.

Any who advocates for healthier food, exercise for young students (they get none now at school), research into the **** they shoot into our arms without any certification from the FDA (the covid vaccine is still not approved by them), not allowing children under 18 to take life altering puberty blockers and chemical castration drugs then they get my support regardless of who appointed them. Frankly, they should get yours as well.

Yes, seriously. I don't hate Trump, I'm afraid of.him and what he can do with both Senate and House in his pocket and appointing Kennedy to a position for which he.is totally unqualified is a sign of things to come. Kennedy may or may not make.good on his threats to make wholesale withdrawals of vaccines, but if he does and.that includes tetanus then he'll be.killing Americans immediately, if it includes (for example), measles and.polio then maiming will take a little longer but it will happen. Over 100 million adults in the USA and you get these kind of folks las your leaders.😣

[WTF11]

I"m assuming that you also believe that Trump was blackmailed with evidence that he paid russian hookers to urinate on him as well. It's obviously true since the CIA, FBI and DOJ all had high ranking officials that stated it in a letter and under oath.

Don't care if that's what floats his boat. As long as he wasn't going to appoint any of the ladies (it was ladies, Yes?) to positions in his administration!

[spaldy]

WTF,

I know you are across the pond so I'm not sure how familiar you are with the US system but...

Trump does not have control of the house or senate. Yes, he has majority in both if you check past history you'll note that unlike the democrats the republicans never "vote in lockstep". There are 5-10 of them in the senate and a higher number in the house that vote as they see fit reflecting their constituents values. Murkowski, Collins, Romney and several others are no more sure votes for laws and appointments than some of the more conservative democrats. It's ever crazier and more unpredictable in the house. It's the reality of the republicans.

The democrats are totally different. They vote as "they are told". They are similar to the politburo or national peoples council in how they vote. Occasionally in votes where republican cross over on a vote they will allow someone to vote against the party but those are only when they know they've won and need to give the appearance that they are "representing their constituents. Pelosi and Schumer have absolute power of their caucus. It's the primary reason that the democrats get more laws passed. The democrats are also quicker to use "executive orders" which allows them to change things that would never get passed by a congress.

The system is broke over here regardless of which side you fall on. Our founding fathers were brilliant. The whole system was brilliantly created to make passing laws and rules very difficult. The senate was never intended to be a rubber stamp for the house bills. They were not "elected" but appointed by each state and were intended to act as a brake on hasty and ill thought out mob rule laws. The 17th amendment in the late 1800's changed it to popular vote and began the long slide into the dysfunctional state we are today. The founding fathers also never, in their wildest dreams, thought that people would want to become politicians for life. It was their #1 concern when you read the federalist papers. They were concerned that they could not get enough good people to serve. They never envisioned that we'd end up with the vile creatures that spend their entire life as politicians. Thus, no term limits. It doesn't help help that these vermin get the best healthcare in the country and live to be in their 80's and 90's and never retire. They are reprehensible creatures that place their power and wealth over the good of the country. Most go in with no money and retire years later with millions and millions in the bank every though they make under 200k a year and live in the most expensive city in the country.

[WTF11]

WTF,

I know you are across the pond so I'm not sure how familiar you are with the US system but...

Trump does not have control of the house or senate. Yes, he has majority in both if you check past history you'll note that unlike the democrats the republicans never "vote in lockstep". There are 5-10 of them in the senate and a higher number in the house that vote as they see fit reflecting their constituents values. Murkowski, Collins, Romney and several others are no more sure votes for laws and appointments than some of the more conservative democrats. It's ever crazier and more unpredictable in the house. It's the reality of the republicans.

The democrats are totally different. They vote as "they are told". They are similar to the politburo or national peoples council in how they vote. Occasionally in votes where republican cross over on a vote they will allow someone to vote against the party but those are only when they know they've won and need to give the appearance that they are "representing their constituents. Pelosi and Schumer have absolute power of their caucus. It's the primary reason that the democrats get more laws passed. The democrats are also quicker to use "executive orders" which allows them to change things that would never get passed by a congress.

The system is broke over here regardless of which side you fall on. Our founding fathers were brilliant. The whole system was brilliantly created to make passing laws and rules very difficult. The senate was never intended to be a rubber stamp for the house bills. They were not "elected" but appointed by each state and were intended to act as a brake on hasty and ill thought out mob rule laws. The 17th amendment in the late 1800's changed it to popular vote and began the long slide into the dysfunctional state we are today. The founding fathers also never, in their wildest dreams, thought that people would want to become politicians for life. It was their #1 concern when you read the federalist papers. They were concerned that they could not get enough good people to serve. They never envisioned that we'd end up with the vile creatures that spend their entire life as politicians. Thus, no term limits. It doesn't help help that these vermin get the best healthcare in the country and live to be in their 80's and 90's and never retire. They are reprehensible creatures that place their power and wealth over the good of the country. Most go in with no money and retire years later with millions and millions in the bank every though they make under 200k a year and live in the most expensive city in the country.

As a UK resident I don't claim to know as much about the situation in the US as you, but the appointments Trump has announced so far are at the very least "surprising", and at worst sh1t-scaring.....at least for some.

You might be right regarding the voting behaviour, but we are in quite new territory now. Trump is a bit of an elephant, mentally anyway, in that he doesn't forget, and he will be well aware that his first term was damaged (in his view) by internal division and a lack of firm loyalty to the Trump cause. He won't allow that to happen this time round, and the results for Senate and House will encourage him to do just exactly what he wants. ergo.....

There have been situations where the House, Senate and Presidency were all subject to one party (a trifecta) on many occasions during the 20th & 21st century, They have occurred under both Democratic and Republican control, and most recently Trump had a trifecta for his first two years but wasn?t able to exploit any legislative advantage as the Democrats used the VPs ability to break ties, and they (the Democrats) chaired all the Senate committees and controlled the chamber giving Biden a trifecta for his two years in office.

So we now have Trump with a trifecta at the outset of his second term, with a Republican majority in House (6) and Senate (9), that allows for the odd loose cannon, perhaps even seen as a good thing providing the illusion of debate and dissent. In actual fact the vast majority of Republicans, particularly those newly elected, in both places owe their position to the impact of Trump. What he gives, he can just as easily take away and they know it.

The early indications are that Trump is going to appoint those he sees as ?loyal? irrespective of their qualifications for any particular position.

Kennedy is one example, Health and Human services, with no experience or expertise in such disciplines. Perhaps he would be better as Attorney General, the legal profession is at least one he has some experience and expertise in, much better than;

Matt Gaetz?..someone who many in his own party would prefer wasn?t confirmed, but we will see.

Tulsi Gabbard??Director of National Intelligence, what a singularly ironic role to give to someone who flips her political allegiances and has ZERO past experience in the management of intelligence services, although apparently happy, partnered by Gaetz, to submit bills that would have led to criminal charges against Edward Snowden and Julian Assange being dropped (happily the bills were defeated).

Pete Hegseth??Secretary of Defense??words fail me.

Kristi Noem??Head of Homeland Security?..presumably she will use her position to advance her views on fossil fuel exploitation despite the evidence regarding global warming, and the future for abortion in the USA, including the federal ban she attempted to legislate for in 2020, as well as planning for the mass deportations Trump has promised? (Oh,, and banning embryonic stem cell research!).

There are more, and the appointments aren?t complete, more surprises to come?

[WTF11]

An article regarding Gabbard;

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/global-alarm-over-trump-picking-tulsi-gabbard-as-intelligence-chief/ar-AA1u6W6x?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=5c94f1a934af491ca5fc174d44208fae&ei=21

Yes, its MSN, but take note of the statements by those who DO have experience in the intelligence services. We (the Brits) have quite a body of experience in such matters, and we're quite good at such things. Take note.

and one relating to Gaetz;

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/foolish-indeed-trump-booster-flags-worrisome-choice-by-president-elect/ar-AA1ua2mk?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=6e2631ad7de44902905483d431617d42&ei=14

Popular guy hmm?

[spaldy]

Don't disagree with your post but...

These are different times over here. We never have had the federal government attack those that oppose them like they have done the last 15 years or so. Trumps first term largely consisted of the DC apparatus attacking him (both parties and all of the bureaucrats that are appointed or have lifetime jobs) as well as his own party scuttling many of his initiatives. In addition, he had actual generals negotiating with the chinese and leaks and intelligence lapses all over the place. His tax returns even were released. In prior times people would be imprisoned and in the case of the general reaching out to the chinese leader even hung. We've never had an ex president charged much less litigated and his house searched including his wifes panty drawer. Previous presidents have loaded up box trucks of documents when leaving and none of them with the secret service overseeing it. All of trumps paperwork was reviewed and released by them. It was unmitigated lawfare more like russia, china or cuba than a free country. The infamous January 6th "insurrection" was a bunch of red necks going into the capitol. The concept of this rag tag group taking over the country is absurd. The most important item that is never mentioned by "journalists" is that trump is not in charge of the capitol police. That would be nancy pelosi.

Trump's picks reflect 100% loyalty so that a repeat of the second term does not occur. Contrary to what is being portrayed by the media they are at least as competent as the previous outgoing administration. That's not saying much but it's the reality. You have to go outside of DC vermin to get people that will actually make changes. Our country is no longer free and has an uncontrolled federal government. They don't work for us... we work for them and they let us know it every chance they get. It's why 5,000,000 more people voted for Trump. It a polarized evenly split country that is a landslide. It certianly wasn't his charm or lovable personality.

You should very, very much root for the US right now. I suspect more than a few people feel the same way about their country. Failure in ours likely acts as an indicator of what's coming for other "free countries".

Argentina is another case study of when people realize they are working for the government rather than the other way around. It's a fascinating real world case study.

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

Whether you love, loathe or are ambivalent to Mr Trump he can rightly claim to have a pretty big mandate for change given how the voting went in terms of the college, share of the popular vote and the results in both houses.

Seems like a large enough part of the population wanted the status quo to change.

If he wants agents of change in key roles then no one should be that surprised.

[WTF11]

And this is what his decisions on appointment has and will do to the shares of companies that form the backbone of pension funds the world over. As a pensioner, I'd just like to say "thanks a lot Ronald MacDonald".

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/14/stock-market-today-live-updates.html

[Oranje White]

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a thing!
Trump is selecting what appears to be good people to drag the swamp of the corrupt, incompetent, free-spending slimey creatures that live there. RFK wants Americans to be healthy again. He wants a full investigation into the experimental poison covid injections that the FDA wanted to hide from the public for 75 years!! Why would that be? The corruption between Fauci and his wife. The lies to congress about gain-of-function that has a money and paper trail. DEI and associated incompetence has been rampant in the current administration. The weaponised DOJ, FBI and CIA. Let's see what comes out....if the lying corrupt media allow. It will come out, and there corruption exposed you never imagined. That, I 100% guarantee!!

[Oranje White]

Yes, seriously. I don't hate Trump, I'm afraid of.him and what he can do with both Senate and House in his pocket and appointing Kennedy to a position for which he.is totally unqualified is a sign of things to come. Kennedy may or may not make.good on his threats to make wholesale withdrawals of vaccines, but if he does and.that includes tetanus then he'll be.killing Americans immediately, if it includes (for example), measles and.polio then maiming will take a little longer but it will happen. Over 100 million adults in the USA and you get these kind of folks las your leaders.😣

You're worried RFK isn't qualified.
Seen the cross dressing, trans, bald, airport baggage thief, who was in charge of nuclear waste disposal under current administration? Or the men dressed as women in charge of some military roles? Ir the border czar who never went to the border? Or the unqualified black lying lesbian press secretary? There's more!

[whitestomper45]

Agreed on the observation regarding how new conflicts might be fought and won, but that statement regarding Nazi Germany having "the best Air Force, Navy and weaponry"???????? Who there fella!!!

A few tidbits regarding what naval assets they had available to them, how "effective" they were at fighting and also "who had what" when it came to air power;

Firstly, I agree with the comment regarding commanders etc. A large part of the allied armies problems at the outbreak of WWII stemmed from the inability to find commanding officers capable of dealing with modern warfare and the development of tactics that were appropriate to that new way of waging war.

Observations on the Naval front;

Graf Spee was scuttled just off Montevideo on evening of Sunday, December 17, 1939 (about 14 weeks after war was declared), in the face of overwhelming British naval forces.

Bismark, the largest and most powerful capital ship in the Kriegsmarine, only sailed once. In May 1941, Bismark took part in an offensive operation codenamed Rheinübung, which resulted in the sinking of HMS Hood (the only vessel to be sunk by Bismark). Bismarcks single major operation lasted just over a week and ended in its destruction by the Royal Navy in the North Atlantic on May 27, 1941.

Tirpitz hid in Norwegian Fjords for almost the whole of its operational life, damaged in an attack by British mini-submarines and large-scale air raids. On 12 November 1944, RAF Lancaster bombers from 617 and 9 squadrons, equipped with 12,000-pound "Tallboy" bombs scored two direct hits and a near miss which caused the ship to capsize rapidly. It never sailed on offensive operations and fired its main armament just once when bombarding Spitzbergen island.

All these ships were in service with that "best navy" at the start of hostilities, but there's not much point having nice shiny toys with big guns if you're too afraid of your opponents to use them?

Where the Kreigsmarine was considerably better off was in the submarine fleet, which very nearly led to the British starving, that I'll give you!

And the air forces?

As the Battle of Britain began in July 1940, RAF Fighter Command had approximately 768 aircraft after the squandering of many during the failed attempt to help the French during the battle for France. Of that number, only 520 were still considered battleworthy. Due to aircraft manufacturers plans for increased production however, particularly distributed production centres making interdiction by German bombers less damaging, this situation improved radically over the next few weeks. By the time the Germans offensive reached its peak in early August, the number of RAF fighters available almost doubled to just over 1,000. British aircraft manufacturers were producing around 500 fighters per month (double the number estimated by German intelligence).

Equipment was not the main concern for Fighter Command, the availability of trained pilots was. The German airforce had had substantial operational experience during the Spanish Civil war, when Hitler assisted the forces under Franco. The experience for both fighter and bomber crews was of great value to the Luftwaffe during the Blitzkreig operations and during the early part of the Battle of Britain (less so as more RAF pilots gained the requisite battle experience and attrition rates fell).

At this time of the war, monthly Luftwaffe fighter production was approximately 300 airframes. However, German production capacity wasn't fully mobilized and failed to produce enough 109s required to overwhelm Fighter Command. By September 7, the Luftwaffe was down to just 533 fighters and temporarily dipped as low as 275. Given these comparative numbers early on the "real war (the "phony war having lasted from September 1939, until May of 1940), the RAF held a significant numerical advantage in both planes available and production capacity.[/B]

The RAF had aircraft broadly equal to those frontline fighters in the Luftwaffe, (Spitfire and Hurricane vs Messerchmitt BF109). The Spitfire had superior climbing speed and turn rates, was slightly slower in level flight and unlike the Bf109 employed a normally aspirated fuel system, meaning inverted flight was very limited. The Hurricane was slower still, and was used during the Battle of Britain as the major bomber attacking force given its superior gun platform performance. The Messerschmitt 110 and Junkers 87 were considerably less of a threat to the RAF, to such an extent that the Ju87 (Stuka) was withdrawn from combat operations after suffering catastrophic losses during attempts to bomb RAF coastal radar stations.

The Luftwaffe was never really that superior, only in numerical terms at the outset of the war and only then for a brief period. What's also worth noting is that the RAF had one crucial technical advantage over the Luftwaffe, radar. Without radar and the associated plotting and fighter control room network, the RAF is unlikely to have been able to maintain a constant airborne presence which would have been required to identify Luftwaffe raids. Without it it's equally unlikely that the RAF would have succeeded in winning the battle.

So yes, the German armed forces had some advantages at the outset of WWII, but the best? Nope.

Just read thru this, as have avoided getting into politics of war on here. I?m sure Spaldy can speak for himself? he never said the Germans were the best
They must have been fairly useful which made their defeat such a great feat!

[spaldy]

WS,

you are correct. However, I should have been clearer. The reality was that Nazi Germany was the best prepared, best generals and troops and the most motivated populace in the world at the start of WWII. Only the briliance of Churchhill, will of the UK people and the fact the Yanks broke the blockade (preventing the collapse of the UK) prevented all of Europe from falling. Russia, or for that matter, china have none of those factors.

[spaldy]

And this is what his decisions on appointment has and will do to the shares of companies that form the backbone of pension funds the world over. As a pensioner, I'd just like to say "thanks a lot Ronald MacDonald".

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/14/stoc...e-updates.html

Your pension fund would be wise to keep your money in the US. Just sayin. As bad as we are I'd be hard pressed to think of anywhere I'd trust my retirement money more. It's a sad state of affairs. It's also why, even if you don't like the US you should not root against us. It's hard to fathom putting your life savings in China, Russia, Japan or even many of the European countries right now. What's much sadder is the loss of a place to go to when you want more freedoms. The US is not everyone's cup of tea but it was always there when you wanted to go someplace with more freedoms (warts and all). That is now largely gone. Our media are propagandists, our government is corrrupt to the core and largely has total control of schools, healthcare and the economy. Once they get digital currency, electric vehicles, control of the health system and education we'll be little different than china