Wie das im Detail aussehen könnte, hat etwa Scott Bessent bereits vor der Präsidentschaftswahl formuliert.
Es ist anderes rum. Die Milliardäre wussten Bescheid. Trump wurde gewählt, um genau die Veränderung durchzusetzen.
Die spannende Frage ist, warum die Zeit diese Informationen nicht schon vor der Wahl zusammengetragen hat.
“America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests.”
This is not new. Even England had a shakedown before WW2 support.
Like when France sold Louisiana to Washington to finance a war against Moscow? Seems like he learned his lessons.
How does this pen out? If those weapons are meant to be used defencively, they have to be second-strike weapons.
This means that Germany needs nuclear submarines because everything else could be hit by Russian nuclear bombs in the assumed Russian attack.
Preparing nuclear weapons on fighter jets only helps to make Germany a target.
France and UK rightfully ask for support for their nuclear weapons program but there is no need to be further involved than financing it.
Dies erklärt, wie Deutschland günstig weiter aufrüsten kann.
Offen ist, ob wir das brauchen. Zur Verteidigung liefert die Schweiz. Sind wir aktuell ein realistisches Ziel für Aggression?
Der Grund ist, dass es ganz schnell in die Systemfrage abrutschen kann: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrielle_Reservearmee
Wenn Arbeitslose nicht leiden, warum sollten dann Menschen arbeiten? Zumindest wird man das bedingungslose Grundeinkommen diskutieren müssen. Und dann kommt die Frage: Muss jeder im Land finanziert werden und wenn ja, wer bekommt Asyl?
According to Yanis Varoufakis, to end the tade imbalances so that the US don’t lose their production capabilities
Yanis Varoufakis explaining the reasoning. Is the on-off-ing the “shock into reducing domestic interest rates” part?
They could, but what do they think will happen then?
Then you have more demand than supply because there is not enough coffee for everybody. This leads to people queueing and some people leaving without coffee.
What’s your opinion of Yanis Varoufakis’ explanation for the tariffs?
What do you mean? There are globally less coffee beans available. Or do you mean the 30%? That’s just an arbitrary number, as I tried to make clear by writing “Let’s say …”.
You believe that the accusation then and now were true and that everybody knew but nobody in the position of power prevented the takeover?
Why is the focus on Trump then and not everybody else?
To me it’s easier to believe that this is drama to distract from changes that are in a way necessary but unpopular.
How about this explanation:
There is a reduced supply of coffee beans. Let’s say 30%. This requires that 30% of customers have to be priced out of the market.
If the coffee shop owners only increase the price by several cents then the demand stays the same. They have to fight for coffee beans which drives up their costs step by step.
However, if they increase the price in advance, and far more than necessary right from the start, then the reduced demand matches the available supply and the value of the coffee beans roughly remains the same which allows them to profit from most of the price hike.
deter another large-scale Russian offensive after any ceasefire
Russia is fighting to prevent NATO troops in Ukrain. Am I mistaken or does this bind Russia to fight until they either collapse or conquer all of Ukrain?
If Trump is a Russian asset, how was he allowed to run for his first term? Various agencies must have known.
Sind Deutschland und die Verbündeten schwächer als Russland?
Unnötige Aufrüstung zwingt ja nur die Gegenseite, ebenfalls aufzurüsten.
Which war does the EU face? The military of the EU is already bigger than the Russian military. European air superiority will destroy any Russian attack.