Trump’s Tragic Alliance With Putin and Netanyahu Against Long Term Allies. The Descent into Darkness

netanyahu and putinI suggest that you can take judicial notice that never in our history has a president-elect caused such turmoil during his transition from election to being sworn into office.  Judicial notice means that the truth of that fact is so notorious or well-known, or so authoritatively attested, that it cannot reasonably be doubted. Is there anyone out there of reasonable intelligence who has been awake during that time who could possibly disagree with that statement?

What then do you make of it? Is it a good thing that so many unsettling things have occurred even before the man is sworn in? Are you comforted knowing that so much has been thrown into doubt since he was elected that the world as you thought you knew it before his election is not that of the world today and he has yet to be sworn in?

You can take judicial notice that for over 70 years not one country in Europe allied with America has invaded another. You can take judicial notice that only Russia has seized land from other countries in Europe and kept those lands. In other words only Russia has flaunted the peace in Europe through the use of force. You also must recognize Russia is run by one party under the control of Putin and is not a democracy.

Now Trump is questioning the value of NATO which has maintained the peace by protecting Europe from Russia’s aggression. (Remember the enslaved nations?) NATO was not set up to fight terrorism which Trump claims it is deficient on doing.

Trump claims NATO is obsolete because it was designed many, many years ago. Will we soon hear him claim other things like our Constitution and Bill of Rights are obsolete because they are old?

Some have alleged NATO threatens Russia even though in its existence it has been a defensive organization. Not once did it do anything to threaten Russia. Some make the nonsensical suggestion  that stationing of a battalion of troops including U.S. soldiers in Poland or sending 300 Marines to Norway threaten Russia. Russia has multiple divisions stationed on the borders its borders. which gives lie to that claim.

Trump has also said he does not care if the EU is separate or together. He backs the British exit from that union. He is hoping to undermine European institutions that have brought us peace. Both attacking NATO and the EU are helpful to Russia which does the same thing. It does not help America or its long-term allies.

A real problem that has already been created. Trump is making America a fickled ally. Many European countries will have lost confidence in the United States. What do we gain by causing  these countries not to trust America?

How is it possible that we would consider abandoning Western Democrat governments who have stuck by our side since WWII in favor of a country that since the days it overthrew Tsar Nicholas II 100 years ago had been trying to undermine democracies, especially America.

I suggest the answer comes from examining the ties between Russia and Israel. As you know Trump plans to move our embassy to Israel. Neither the EU or any other European nation will follow that move. The EU foreign minister said: “It is very important for us all to refrain from unilateral actions, especially those that can have serious consequences in large sectors of public opinion in large parts of the world,” The French foreign minister said it would be “a provocation.”

That move in and of itself will cause a rupture of our relations with Europe. Who benefits by that except Russia and Israel. Will Russia then follow Trump’s move? In June Putin and Netanyahu met face-to-face for the fourth time in a year. Netanyahu stated after that meeting: “We discussed the continued coordination between our two militaries in the region, which already works quite well.

Trump is on the course to set a policy as dictated by Putin and Netanyahu two national leaders who despised Obama. That is because Obama stood to keep the United States strong and to protest against Israeli settlements. Trump is now standing up for them against the United States by weakening our alliances and promoting settlements.

Today a man will be sworn in who will lead American into the darkness.


56 thoughts on “Trump’s Tragic Alliance With Putin and Netanyahu Against Long Term Allies. The Descent into Darkness

  1. There’s a hundred thousand people marching on the Winter Palace in Madison, Wississippi! Only, ten were expected. I hope hope that prick Walker is watching.

  2. Couldn’t get brighter.

    Lahkota singers. Too, cool. I’m a linguist. Water is life.

    And, now that the day is done, comes the real fun, a carnival of masks. Prison riot!

    All power to the dialectic!

  3. More weather:

    Hell, what you talk’in bout, (fascist dogs)?!?

    Weather gett’in better, and, better.

    Angela Davis. Awright! Now, we’re getting some place!

    Oceti Sakowin, and, BLM, get high praise. Gaza, too.

    The Weatherman has to feed goats. Back, later.

  4. Old Scratch is just ahead of the water cannons as usual. When the rubber bullet crowd have the sanction to restore peace in the Republic it is remarkable how effectively modern technology works. Watch out in the Black Bloc Protest Trust Fund Hothouse Flower Brigade. The tall masked fellow who just threw the barrel next to you may actually be one of …. THEM 🙂

  5. Man, it’s really bright out here. Another Sister’s reading poetry: No hate, no bigotry, no Muslim registry. (This weatherman likes the sound of that.)

    Stay tuned.

  6. Some rain coming:

    Oh no! That little turd from Florida, the congresswoman from Pay-Day Loans, is backing up Kamila Harris. Too many bought out bourgeois Democrats are getting to the mike. Stay tuned.

    1. Things are looking up.

      There’s a poet letting loose with her stuff, “My Mother was a Freedom Fighter.”

      The sun’s peaking out, again.

      A lady in a huipile is talking through a speaking cross, a child. All praise to EGP!

      Hijabi Sister hot with ire, show the man your fire. All good.

      Red Girl, eloquently, proves more than an actor.

      Stay tuned.

      1. The sun’s way up there.

        Tamika says it loud, and, proud.

        hamdu-lillahi! There’s another Muslim sister letting loose! Let the fascists have it! All praise to Palestine! La illaha il Allah!

        Stay tuned.

        1. Sun still shining:

          Holy Smokes! We got Cahto folks in Satanville.

          Muslim Sister light’em up! Let’s get roll’in to the Revo.

          Weingarten, really good. Whipping things to a froth.

          Back, in the old days, some wags in the logistics chain would load up pick-ups full of hand-sized projectiles and deliver them to the demo.

  7. Matt, here’s an alternate view, in addition to those above:

    January 20, 2017
    Who is the Reactionary on Nato and the EU? Not Trump
    Filed under: History,Military,Politics,Russia — The Professor @ 7:31 pm

    So it’s official. Donald John Trump is now president of the United States. Buckle in. It will be a wild ride.

    One reason it will be wild is that Trump has much contempt for the status quo, and shows no hesitation in saying so. He gave a taste of things to come in an interview last week. He questioned the viability of the EU, saying that it disproportionately benefited German at the expense of other countries. He also called Nato obsolete.

    The reaction was immediate and hysterical. Was this warranted?

    Not in my view.

    Take Germany. Trump was making an observation. It is an opinion shared by large numbers of Europeans, especially in the south. It is a reasonable observation. And that’s probably why the Europhiles are freaking out: they know that the EU is under great strain and that its popular support is thin and wavering, and would prefer that everybody Believe! Believe! so Euro-Tinker Bell lives.

    But what about dissing Germany, our stalwart ally? First, anti-American sentiment is very strong in Germany, and is often expressed by government officials. Second, the German government has often made unfavorable comments about American policy. If you can’t take it, don’t dish it out.

    Given all the frenzy about Trump’s alleged affinity for Russia and threat it poses to the west and western solidarity, let’s remember that there are very strong pro-Russian elements in Germany. Especially in the business community. Germany, don’t forget, is the country of “Putin Verstehers”–Putin understanders. It’s ex-chancellor is on the board of a Gazprom subsidiary, and Germany has actively supported Nord Stream against the objections of neighboring EU countries. Putin can only dream that Trump will be as accommodating to Russia as Germany has been. So don’t put the onus on Trump for compromising western interests in dealing with Russia. Merkel’s worries about that are far closer to home, as in her coalition partners, notably her Foreign Minister.

    Insofar as Nato is concerned, it is obsolete, in the sense that it has not updated its mission, strategy, or capabilities in response to dramatic changes that have occurred in the last 25 years, let alone the nearly 70 years since its founding. Indeed, it is arguable that Nato is not just obsolete, but dysfunctional.

    Nato countries spend piteously small amounts on defense, and the capability that they get is not worth what little they do spend. Germany spends around 1 percent of GDP on defense. There have been times recently that German troops had to train with broomsticks. Recently 2/3s of its combat aircraft were inoperable. It has zero capability to deploy anything overseas. The Dutch have no tanks. I could go on. Suffice it to say that Europe does not put its money where its mouth is when it comes to Nato. They pay lip service, rather than for troops and weapons. I would take their pieties about Nato more seriously if they actually sacrificed anything for it.

    (By the way, this is why Russian hyperventilating about the Nato threat is absurd. It poses no military threat, beyond that which the US poses unilaterally. Indeed, for reasons that I discuss below, the European Nato Lilliputians tie down the American Gulliver.)

    Another example of dysfunction is Montenegro’s impending bid to join Nato. Just what is the rationale for this? There is none: Montenegro brings no military capability, but just adds an additional obligation.

    But it’s worse than than. Nato’s biggest weakness is its governance structure, which requires unanimity and consensus in major decisions. This is flagrantly at odds with one of the principles of war–unity of command–and makes Nato decision making cumbersome and driven by the least common denominator. Nato’s governance, in other words, makes it all too easy for an adversary to get inside its decision loop.

    Coalitions are always militarily problematic: Napoleon allegedly rejoiced at the news that another nation had joined one of the coalitions against him. Nato’s everybody gets a vote and a trophy philosophy aggravates the inherent problems in military coalitions.

    Put differently, decision making power in Nato bears no relationship to contribution and capability. This is a recipe for dysfunction.

    So what is the point of adding yet another non-contributor (population 620K!) whose consent is required to undertake anything of importance? This is madness.

    It is especially insane when one considers that Montenegro is a Slavic country with longstanding ties to Russia, and in which Russia has a paternalistic interest. Parliamentary elections last year were extremely contentious, with the pro-western incumbents barely hanging on. Post-election, there were allegations of an attempted coup engineered by the Russians. The country is extraordinarily corrupt. All of which means that if you are concerned about Russia undermining Nato, Montenegro is the last country you would want to admit. It is vulnerable to being suborned by Russia. Outside of Nato-who cares what Russia does there? Inside of Nato-that is a serious concern, especially given the nature of Nato governance.

    But apparently current Nato members believe that it would be really cool to collect the entire set of European countries: frankly, I can think of no other justification. There is no better illustration of how Nato has lost its way, its strategic purpose, and its ability to think critically.

    So yes, Trump is more than justified in raising doubts about Nato, and if questioning the relevance of the organization is what is needed for people to get serious about it and to reform it to meet current realities, then he’s done a service.

    Following the shrieking and moaning on Twitter today during the inauguration, it struck me that the most prevalent theme was that Trump is turning his back on X years of US policy in this, that, and the other thing. The reaction shows that the real conservatives–in the literal, traditional sense of the word meaning unflinching defenders of the old order and status quo–are on the leftist/statist side of the political spectrum. They are petrified at the thought of disturbing in the least way the existing order. To them, it is apostasy even to question this order. Trump is challenging all their verities, and it drives them to apoplexy.

    The EU and Nato are two examples of institutions that are supposedly sacrosanct, but which Trump has had the temerity to question. The defense by the real conservatives–the real reactionaries, actually–on the left and left-center has been unthinking and reflexive. They refuse to acknowledge the rot and decay that exists, and which threatens the viability of the things they claim to admire. Rather than neurotically projecting their fears on Trump, they should thank him for giving them the opportunity to reform dysfunctional bodies, and join in the work of reforming them. Not that I expect that they will, because this is not in the nature of conservatives and reactionaries


    The United States has just had three consecutive eight-year presidencies, and it’s only the second time in history that that’s happened. The only other such moment came on March 4, 1825, 192 years ago.

    That’s a bit surprising, given the strong example George Washington’s two terms as president set and the rule established by the 22nd Amendment, adopted after Franklin Roosevelt won third and fourth terms in wartime, imposing a two-term limit. It owes something to the tragic happenstance that the four presidents who were assassinated might well have completed two terms otherwise.

    There are some striking contrasts between the 24 years that ended in 1825 and the 24 years ending with the inauguration of Donald Trump. The three eight-year presidents then — Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe — were Virginians who were, despite some tussles, political allies and members of the same political party. Their houses were just a day’s ride then (an hour’s drive today) from one another.

    The last years of Monroe’s administration were dubbed by historians as the Era of Good Feelings. The opposition Federalist Party didn’t run a candidate in the 1820 election and held only a handful of seats in Congress.

    No one would call any large part of the past 24 years an era of good feelings. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama were each succeeded by a president of the other party. Parties opposing the president had majorities in the House of Representatives for 14 years and in the Senate for 11 1/2 years of the 24-year period. And the presidents were re-elected with just 49.2, 50.7 and 51.1 percent of the vote, respectively.
    CARTOONS | Bob Gorrell
    View Cartoon

    Clinton was impeached in his second term. Bush was administered an electoral “thumping” in the midterm election during his second term, and Obama received similar treatment in 2010 and 2014. Although Clinton and Bush refrained from blaming their problems on their predecessors, Obama stopped doing so only as his second term was nearing its end.

    But there are similarities to the pair of three consecutive eight-year presidencies, as well. The so-called Era of Good Feelings followed a war as divisive and inconclusive as the Iraq War. The War of 1812 inspired threats of secession by New Englanders and is celebrated by Canadians as a victory. Americans took solace only from the treaty negotiated by John Quincy Adams and the victory won in New Orleans by Andrew Jackson after the treaty was signed but before the news crossed the ocean.

    Congress was also deeply split back then. It was over the issue of slavery in the territories. So there was a compromise in 1820 whereby Missouri was admitted into the union as a slave state and Maine, detached from Massachusetts, was admitted as a free state. The dispute was “like a fire bell in the night,” wrote Thomas Jefferson, “the knell of the Union.” He continued, “It is hushed indeed for the moment, but this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence.” It would ring again, more loudly, four decades later.

    And the inauguration 192 years ago also evoked cries of illegitimacy, perhaps even more so than this year’s. There were four major candidates, each claiming the mantle of Jefferson’s party. Jackson had won a plurality of popular votes (though legislatures chose electors in six states) and a plurality in the Electoral College, but Adams had been a close second, while third-place finisher William Crawford had been crippled by a stroke.

    The House of Representatives, where Henry Clay was the longtime speaker, spurned Jackson and chose Adams, who promptly named Clay secretary of state even though Clay had opposed Adams’ policies when he held that office.

    “A corrupt bargain!” shouted Jackson backers — not without cause — just as Trump’s opponents keep reminding us that Hillary Clinton won a plurality (not a majority as some say) of the popular vote. But both the sixth and the 45th presidents were chosen in scrupulous accord with the Constitution.

    Jackson’s supporters kept up the clamor and elected him unambiguously four years later; Adams, as his father had when Jefferson beat him 28 years before, skipped the inauguration. From their conflict sprang the Democratic and the Whig — and eventually the Republican — parties.

    In 1824, Jackson was regarded as a wild man — impetuous and unfit for the presidency — by Jefferson, Madison and Monroe. Each surely preferred the scholarly, internationally experienced Adams.

    And today, all of Trump’s three eight-year predecessors take a similar view of him, though all three accepted invitations to his inauguration. But many other presidents — Abraham Lincoln and both Roosevelts, plus some duds — didn’t have support from living predecessors, either. Donald Trump is not quite so unprecedented as many of those unversed in history think.

  9. What’s in the sky for this afternoon?

    Red star rising. There’s fire in the East!

    Ashley Judd’s giving a barn-burning speech. Couldn’t do better myself. A Muslim sister is coming up to the mike, next. It’s sure better TV than that bullshit, yesterday

    Stay tuned for more of this afternoon’s developing weather.

    1. It’s worth noting that Trump didn’t call for anything approaching shared sacrifice. ISIS will be wiped from the face of the Earth, he said. That’s it. Evidently, this will be achieved without any U.S. military casualties or retaliatory terror bombings on our soil. The people are now in charge, but the people, evidently, won’t have any of the burdens or responsibilities of leadership. Just head for the ‘fridge, crack another cold one, and relax!



  11. Watching the ladies’ marches? Glorious Leader should show them who’s the boss. He could promise to pardon Bill Cosby. That would send a message.

  12. Psalm 91:4 …. He will cover you with his wings
    ….. And his faithfulness will be your
    shield and buckler. 🙂

  13. ★ He asked me to have a large grey wooden Bond Construction toolbox removed from under bridge on Storrow Drive side. We happily complied. They are thorough. 🙂

  14. Khalid, Fair enough. Semantic brilliance remains your shield and buckler. I rousted a Secret Service Agent in 2000 when I was engineering and safety inspector on Longfellow Bridge project. President Bush was due to circuit through in several days. Agent was reconning alternate route and suspiciously eyeing local ” Bridge denizens. ” I was the detective on that beat and when I approached him to determine his status I was so nonplussed at his casually identifying himself as an Agent that I figured he was another ” Crazy Cat. ” As I have a deep regard for all cats, crazy or not, I politely requested his credentials. He efficiently produced them. We spent the next hour together reviewing the Bridge. He gave me a Secret Service pin when he left. It beats anything I ever got in a crackerjack box. No, I do not think you were making a threat. They are extremely humorless as to any even vaguely perceived threat. Of this I am certain sure . 🙂

    1. Looks as if the high raised fist and the middle finger are the answer to Glorious Leader. God take him. Revolution, now! There’s fire on the skyline. I can hear the sound of marching feet. All praise to the Red&Black street-fighters! Let’s get it on! All power to the dialectic!

      I see a day when fat pigs driving luxury cars can expect to be stoned at any stop-light. Rock the Rich! There will be a new movement, a mighty wave, rising from the streets. The people have big-time git-back coming from the capitalist swine. Down with greed. Down with Trump! Death to the Brown-shirts! Forward, into struggle, march to the sound of breaking glass.

      Workers of the world unite, you have only your chains to lose.

      1. hmm…”Rock the Rich” would make a great meme. Innocuous, but, pithy. If you are wealthy and line up with the pigs, you probably won’t like it. Too, bad.

  15. John: You misunderstand, if I wanted to be tart, I’d say “Devil take him.” “God take him” is more of an ironic comment. Take him where? To a place Glorious Leader doesn’t really believe exists? Where’s the threat in that?

  16. I don’t think the Democrats are doing anything more disrespectful than the birther hoax meant to delegitimize President Obama, or Barack Hussein Obama, as these folks love to call him. As for elitism, check out Trump himself and his cabinet picks. Drain the swamp? Please.

  17. What’s the odds on Senor del Cielo getting a rule 31b in his rat package? Justice is moving mighty quick for Shorty. He gets extradited, and, within 24hrs. , cops a plea in Federal Court. Wa-llahi! That’s what I call a deal! I bet he does less time than Noriega. Archivaldo was dead in the Mexican penal environment. He had to split local custody. It was the smart move. He’ll get a big bit, but, it will be whittled down in exchange for his testimony.

    Sorry, I apologize for taking the spotlight off Glorious Leader. God take him.

    1. Bill: If you were an uneducated white, black, or, brown guy, you were much more likely to be in a rifle company out in the field. Those were the guys who couldn’t fight the draft. Usually, they didn’t have the necessary literacy to defend themselves. They just accepted that being screwed by the G was part of life. Bill, what planet did you live on during the sixties, and, early seventies? Somebody’s got you crammed full of shit about what happened, back, in the way back.

  18. Khalid …. THE LOYAL OPPOSITION 🙂 Chill Kamerado … God Takes Us All ..with or without a Secret Service visit 🙂

  19. Keep watching the Mosul battle, Trumpist Dads, and, Gran-Dads. The future of your kids, and, gran-kids, beckons from the Eastern Front. From the sound of Trump’s threats against DAESH, he’ll soon be wading in blood. Who’s blood? Their blood. Check out “McNamara’s Folly.” It’s a fine book about who actually had to go to fight in VN. I say “fight” because the book is all about the guys who went into the field, not the rear echelons (There’s lot of cool facts and statistics in the book; did you know that although African-Americas were only 13% of the US population during the VN years (1965-72), they furnished 40% of the front-line grunts.) It’s my prediction that the modern day equivalent of that very same socio-economic group, dumb-ass cracker white-boys included, will be the cannon fodder for the expanding Mideast War.

    God take our President. All power to the Dialectic!

  20. America! America!
    God mend thine every flaw,
    Confirm thy soul in self-control,
    Thy liberty in law!

  21. America is still the best country in the world. It’s not perfect and there’s still a lot of work to do to make it better. While recognizing its lapses and faults, I celebrate its history and achievements along so many fronts. “From the mountains, to the valleys, to the oceans white with foam, God bless America, my home, sweet home!”

  22. Check out Matt Taibbis’ new book about Glorious Leader. It’s titled “Insane Clown President. You don’t need a college education to understand the humor, but, it helps.

  23. I have a new verb for all the liberal dems who are having temper tantrums over the election.They got whomped as in Wisconsin,Ohio,Michigan and Pennsylvania.,states they ignored during the election.Gore lost his home state to Bush but dems prefer to blame Scalia for that one. As President Obama said so presciently,”Elections have consequences”.

  24. Matt: as always, your comments are thoughtful and thought provoking.

    1. I reject the “Judicial Notice” bit. Between Lincoln’s election and inauguration seven states left the Union; they did so because Lincoln was a “free soil” man, opposed to the expansion of slavery in western states. Nothing more divisive than a civil war. After Jackson was elected, his wife Rachel died of a heart attack in December before his inauguration; many blamed the anti-Jackson JQA-supporters for the most bitterly divisive campaign in American history and said her death was due to the stress of that campaign. Jackson magnanimously forgave his detractors; the JQA-supporters did not reciprocate and remained bitter. Other divisive campaigns left wounds and scars.
    2. As for European countries not invading others: you forget the bombing of Serbia over Kosovo, and the US/NATO 1967 coup in Greece, and the British/French/Israeli invasion of Egypt stopped by Ike; and the recent US/NATO bombings of Libya/Syria etc.
    3. We’ve debated before the Russia issue in Ukraine, Crimea, Georgia. For a brief encapsulation of US involvement in the coup in the Ukraine see: (Posted below.) The West’s hands are not that clean.
    4. Trump’s major beef with NATO is that Europe is shirking its financial responsibilities.
    5. As far as no problem with thousands of NATO/US troops on Russia’s borders, remember we almost had a nuclear war when Russia stationed 10,000 troops in Cuba during Kennedy’s administration.

  25. Today is Donald John Trump’s Day! He worked indefatigably for it. We Irish always have had the Class to recognize when it is not appropriate to rain on the parade. This post is disappointing . It is rancorous. It is not mete to … THE DAY 🙂 … Melania Trump is a VISION OF BEAUTY … BEHOLD! …And give the sour tone a rest for this day at least … None of US are getting any younger … Including Nancy Sinatra 🙂

  26. I always believed ‘ipse dixit’ meant finders keepers…but the Dems have been insufferable throughout the transition of an elected President…My sister’s note to Steve lynch follows:

    Having witnessed the ” classless” behavior of both Democratic Senators in confirmation hearings this week which in no way could be confused with reasonable behavior by a loyal opposition & the decision to boycott the peaceful transition tomorrow, I want to register my appreciation that you have not chosen to engage in the really bad behavior of so many in your party. Donald Trump was not my first choice though I certainly voted for him rather than Mrs. Clinton and I have weathered 2 terms of a President who I believe did serious damage to this country. I expect the Democratic Party to accept the results of the last election. It was the outgoing President who chastised all of us that elections have consequences. I suspect I am not the only constituent in your District who will not lament that gentleman’s leavetaking nor be unhappy that Mrs, Clinton will not be taking the oath as his successor .I used to be a Democrat un til it became apparent that there was no place anymore in that party for a person who believed in the sanctity of life & the Constitution. I certainly do not expect members of your party to agree with me on issues but I do deserve and expect them to honor our governmental system and the results of the election. And as a former Democrat & current unenrolled voter I am sick to death of Democrat elitism.

    1. Great letter.

      Let us never “be unhappy that Mrs, Clinton will not be taking the oath as his successor .”

Comments are closed.