That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
Neither is Scotch.
You're also not thinking like Trump. It won't surprise me if he opens the FIRST champagne facility in the United States- Trump Champagne - just to demonstrate the French can't own a word!
Had. We *had* the economy the world envies. Between the erratic tariffs, decimating the federal government, attacking education, defunding scientific research, turning away from green energy, deporting our low-income workforce, blowing up our alliances, and (soon) giving our oligarchs an enormous deficit-financed tax cut...the economy that the bottom 90% of us inhabit is doomed, and it's not going to come back.IceBear wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 11:12 am
You guys have the economy that the world envies but sure, you're being ripped off. Also Mr Trump you're the one acting like it's the 1920s and 30s when it comes to antiquated thinking
Omg, that would be amazing!Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 1:10 pmYou're also not thinking like Trump. It won't surprise me if he opens the FIRST champagne facility in the United States- Trump Champagne - just to demonstrate the French can't own a word!
I understand...just saying that is what Trump is saying is the reason for his tariffs. If it's not broke, don't fix itKraken wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 1:11 pmHad. We *had* the economy the world envies. Between the erratic tariffs, decimating the federal government, attacking education, defunding scientific research, turning away from green energy, deporting our low-income workforce, blowing up our alliances, and (soon) giving our oligarchs an enormous deficit-financed tax cut...the economy that the bottom 90% of us inhabit is doomed, and it's not going to come back.IceBear wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 11:12 am
You guys have the economy that the world envies but sure, you're being ripped off. Also Mr Trump you're the one acting like it's the 1920s and 30s when it comes to antiquated thinking
Trump will manage to change the very nature of the word "trump".IceBear wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 1:21 pm
I understand...just saying that is what Trump is saying is the reason for his tariffs. If it's not broke, don't fix it
According to the French. American sparkling wine makers call their product Champagne, regardless of what other countries and oenophiles might prefer.pr0ner wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 12:56 pmChampagne is literally not made in the US.Smoove_B wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 12:14 pm Up next, champagne:
President Donald Trump said Thursday he plans to put a 200% tariff on alcohol from France and other European nations in the latest escalation of global trade tensions.
The U.S. tariff comes after the European Union moved to reinstate an import tax on American whiskey.
“The European Union, one of the most hostile and abusive taxing and tariffing authorities in the World, which was formed for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the United States, has just put a nasty 50% Tariff on Whisky. If this Tariff is not removed immediately, the U.S. will shortly place a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES. This will be great for the Wine and Champagne businesses in t
In the European Union and many other countries, the name Champagne is legally protected by the Madrid system under an 1891 treaty, which reserved it for the sparkling wine produced in the eponymous region and adhering to the standards defined for it as an appellation d'origine contrôlée; the protection was reaffirmed in the Treaty of Versailles after World War I. Over 70 countries have adopted similar legal protection. ... The United States bans the use of all new U.S.-produced wine brands. However, those that had approval to use the term on labels before 2006 may continue to use it, provided the term is accompanied by the wine's actual origin (e.g., "California"). The majority of US-produced sparkling wines do not use the term Champagne on their labels, and some states, such as Oregon, ban producers in their states from using the term.
The no name, generic brand is "hand meals", I believe.Blackhawk wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 3:47 pm Can you eat a sandwich in Pittsburgh? Or is it meat with bread handles?
If we know there's one thing that MAGA is concerned with, it's misleading the consumer.LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 3:21 pm Cognac is similarly named after the region in France that it comes from.but there are other standards and requirements.it must meet to use the name. Randomly calling a brandy "Cognac" would be misleading to the consumer.
Oregon, too. Don’t forget about us. Significant (and very, very good) wine production here in the Willamette Valley.Blackhawk wrote: Thu Mar 13, 2025 1:10 pm I don't think he realizes that if domestic wine and champagne flourish, it will be California that stands to benefit (especially since most of their exports are to Britain.)
Vladimir Putins revenge for the USSR. Edit for: Holy shit. You guys think Trumps trying to crash the economy so he can do another bailout? Only more directed and a lot larger then a trillion?Zarathud wrote: Wed Mar 12, 2025 6:28 pmTrump doesn’t want to negotiate because this is how you destroy Western economies without Russia firing a single bullet.IceBear wrote:He really pisses me off. He put tariffs on world wide steel and aluminum, so Canada and the EU are replying with tariffs of their own. Now Trump is mad and said he's going to up the ante. What the fuck does he think everyone is going to do? Just roll over and take it? So he's probably going to raise the tariffs (I hope that's all he's going to do) and everyone will probably raise their response back into a vicious cycle. He could just decide to negotiate with everyone.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada ... -1.7483312Ontario Premier Doug Ford and federal officials left an hours-long meeting with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick saying they feel more positive about the Canada-U.S. trading relationship after weeks of bad blood and heated rhetoric.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Ford said he feels like "the temperature is being lowered, the temperature's coming down" after the bilateral talks.
"This, I can honestly say, was the best meeting I've ever had coming down here. We want the best outcome for both countries. We're like a family — sometimes there's tension between families but that was an extremely productive meeting. I'm feeling positive," he said.
I didn't realize that Trump Jr and Musk both also went to Wharton and probably overlapped by a year. Trump Jr '97 and Musk '00.Zarathud wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 6:22 pm And Americans will pay for it. Tariffs hurting economic activity is Economics 101. Someone can’t remember or didn’t pay attention during his Wharton MBA.
I've said this before, but it bears repeating: never be impressed by Wharton grads. They have very little to offer the world.LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 1:33 pm I didn't realize that Trump Jr and Musk both also went to Wharton and probably overlapped by a year. Trump Jr '97 and Musk '00.
It's like Yale's Skull & Bones, but for morons. Numbskull and Bones? Dull as Stones?
Keep in mind, that was Ford's opinion and that even if it was true during that meeting, at the same time Trump was again saying the tariffs would remain and Canada only makes sense as a 51st State. It doesn't really matter what anyone else says or thinks if the "king" says otherwise.Rumpy wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 1:24 pm Ford's meeting in DC apparently was quite productive and positive, and they plan on having another one. Ford notes that the temperature is coming down.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada ... -1.7483312Ontario Premier Doug Ford and federal officials left an hours-long meeting with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick saying they feel more positive about the Canada-U.S. trading relationship after weeks of bad blood and heated rhetoric.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Ford said he feels like "the temperature is being lowered, the temperature's coming down" after the bilateral talks.
"This, I can honestly say, was the best meeting I've ever had coming down here. We want the best outcome for both countries. We're like a family — sometimes there's tension between families but that was an extremely productive meeting. I'm feeling positive," he said.
I don't disagree, it's more I've lost any sense of optimism when it comes to dealing with Trump and his toadies. As I said to my wife, I'm sure Chamberlain had positive thoughts after his meeting with HitlerRumpy wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 2:45 pm Sure, but I think it does matter in the sense that the tone has changed, as it already feels more hopeful that something has come out of it, given that they also want another meeting. That's progress. The fact that there's talk rather than constant threats, I count that as progress. And he's made more progress than anyone at this point.
I've had a lot of requests to put together a comparison of the rhetoric Putin used before invading Ukraine and what Trump has been saying about Canada.
After looking at it, I really wish I hadn't. But here it is, and its nightmare fuel. I've always been a skeptic. I don't bother with conspiracy theories. Hard evidence is the only thing that matters to me.
I can't believe I'm about to type these words, but this is rapidly spiraling out of control, and we need to take this extremely seriously. The joke's not funny anymore.
As always, PLEASE don't take my word for it. Do your own research on multiple sources. Utilize AI software like Claude, Chatgpt or Perplexity to fact check any information you find out there that feels misleading. We're now living in a post-truth world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Challenging Sovereignty and Legitimacy**
Putin:
Claimed Ukraine wasn't a "real" nation and questioned the legitimacy of its statehood, emphasizing historical ties to Russia and framing Ukraine as an artificial creation.
Trump:
Has implied Canada’s political sovereignty or autonomy is compromised, suggesting it is weak or subordinate, and that its leadership is failing or illegitimate in effectively governing its own territory, particularly in immigration or national security.
**Framing as National Security Threats**
Putin:
Argued that Ukraine posed a security risk to Russia, frequently citing NATO expansion and alleged threats to Russian speakers in Ukraine as justification for action.
Trump:
Suggests Canada's border policies and immigration stance are threats to U.S. national security, emphasizing supposed vulnerabilities or dangers from Canada’s approach to immigration. False claims of Canadian fentanyl killing Americans. Said Canada’s immigration policies were causing "tremendous danger" to U.S. security, implying Canada's negligence endangered Americans.
**Appeal to Historical or Cultural Unity**
Putin:
Asserted deep historical, cultural, and linguistic unity between Russia and Ukraine to justify intervention, framing the invasion as restoring historical justice.
Trump:
References cultural affinity between the U.S. and Canada but has also implied the need for the U.S. to exert influence or pressure on Canadian policies, subtly suggesting Canada should align more closely with U.S. interests, especially in immigration control. Suggested Canada is failing in its responsibilities as a close cultural partner to America, implying the U.S. should step in or exert greater influence on Canadian policy.
**Narratives of Weak Leadership**
Putin:
Painted Ukraine’s leadership as illegitimate, weak, or compromised by external (Western) powers.
Trump:
Criticized Canada's leadership—particularly Justin Trudeau—as weak, ineffective, or controlled by external liberal or globalist interests, thereby questioning its sovereignty indirectly. Demeans Prime Minister Trudeau by referring to him as 'Governor Trudeau'.
**Creating Urgency or Justification for Action**
Putin:
Used perceived crises, like alleged oppression of Russian-speaking Ukrainians or NATO threats, to justify preemptive measures.
Trump:
Utilizes crises—such as immigration influxes, drugs, or perceived security gaps—to justify calls for increased U.S. influence over Canada’s internal policies or borders.
**Narrative of "Restoring Order" or "Protecting Borders"*
Putin:
Framed military action as restoring order, protecting Russian borders, and securing Russians living abroad
Trump:
Portrayed stronger U.S. action against Canadian border and immigration policy as necessary to restore order, secure borders, and protect Americans. Stated, "Canada is very, very weak on immigration," suggesting American intervention or tougher policies at the border might be necessary to keep Americans safe.
I know, but the fact that Trump could sit right next to the Secretary General of NATO and threaten two NATO members isn't nothing. I get it, everyone is trying their best to avoid pissing off the US right now so they are minding their manners, but at some point someone needs to stand up to him and tell him No! Bad dog!Blackhawk wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:06 pm Wildly different situations. For one thing, Ukraine wasn't a NATO member.
Ukraine was part of the USSR then. I believe I've read that Ukrainians made up the largest proportion of the Red Army.Rumpy wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:18 pm Not to mention that Ukraine itself had been invaded during WWII when it thought it could rely on the Russians as allies. Zelensky himself is among the descendents of those who fled and almost had his lineage destroyed. But Canada on the other hand has never been put into a similar situation, unless you count the earlier centuries that lead to its formation as a Country.
Time to rescue our American-speaking brothers and sisters from under the boot of bi-lingual oppression.**Appeal to Historical or Cultural Unity**
Putin:
Asserted deep historical, cultural, and linguistic unity between Russia and Ukraine to justify intervention, framing the invasion as restoring historical justice.
Trump:
References cultural affinity between the U.S. and Canada but has also implied the need for the U.S. to exert influence or pressure on Canadian policies, subtly suggesting Canada should align more closely with U.S. interests, especially in immigration control. Suggested Canada is failing in its responsibilities as a close cultural partner to America, implying the U.S. should step in or exert greater influence on Canadian policy.
I did read a historical fiction novel that had Ukrainians fleeing from Russians, and Germans no less. The Last Green Valley by Mark Sullivan, I believe. Either way, Canada is in a very different situation.Holman wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 4:36 pmUkraine was part of the USSR then. I believe I've read that Ukrainians made up the largest proportion of the Red Army.Rumpy wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:18 pm Not to mention that Ukraine itself had been invaded during WWII when it thought it could rely on the Russians as allies. Zelensky himself is among the descendents of those who fled and almost had his lineage destroyed. But Canada on the other hand has never been put into a similar situation, unless you count the earlier centuries that lead to its formation as a Country.
Moscow treated the Ukrainian SSR terribly during the 1930s in order to bring them in line, including a manufactured famine.Rumpy wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 6:41 pmI did read a historical fiction novel that had Ukrainians fleeing from Russians, and Germans no less. The Last Green Valley by Mark Sullivan, I believe. Either way, Canada is in a very different situation.Holman wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 4:36 pmUkraine was part of the USSR then. I believe I've read that Ukrainians made up the largest proportion of the Red Army.Rumpy wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:18 pm Not to mention that Ukraine itself had been invaded during WWII when it thought it could rely on the Russians as allies. Zelensky himself is among the descendents of those who fled and almost had his lineage destroyed. But Canada on the other hand has never been put into a similar situation, unless you count the earlier centuries that lead to its formation as a Country.
Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Jul 21, 2011 11:16 pm Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin
A truly enlightening book about the period between 1932 and 1945 that covers the institutionalized death that was enacted on the lands between Germany and the Soviet Union, covering the famines applied to the Ukrain, Stalin's purges, and, of course, the Holocaust.
The book is full of personal details of those who suffered and died at the hands of these two countries, and gives a much deeper insight into how the policies developed and evolved, how they ere applied, and the justifications in play at the time.