Trump Offers Biden Administration His Services to Help Stave Off World War III

Uncategorized 1 Minute

Source: PJ Media.

Donald Trump has offered to negotiate for peace between Russia and Ukraine. Some people hate the man, but since no one else is expressing any interest in avoiding a nuclear WW III, I’d hope they put their hatred aside.

Or if the Trump haters cannot stop hating Trump, perhaps one of them could negotiate for peace. Not appeasement, mind you, but peace.

Published by John Todd Roberts

Published

80 thoughts on “Trump Offers Biden Administration His Services to Help Stave Off World War III”

  1. We have a President that the people elected. He is responsible for our foreign relations. This silly grandstanding by Trump is laughable. And doubly so just days after his very loose public talk about World War 3 and the stupidity of our leaders.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  2. Peace would be nice. Perhaps Ukraine exchanging Donetsk and Luhansk for Mariupol west to Crimea. After all, Putin want those two oblasts since he started a phony uprising in 2014.

    Interesting that the opinion touts Trumps negotiating skills. I am not sure he has any considering the facts now arising about his business, taxes, loans and fraudulent valuations of his properties. Stiffing vendors and then counter suing is not negotiation, it is extortion disguised as gaming the system.

    N.Korea went nowhere. China was costing us a ton of money between tariffs and subsidies until the pandemic hit. The Saudi-Israeli deal was nice, but appears to have been bought by Kushner. Immigration reform was promised, including a wall, then reneged for nothing.

    Right now he is whining about his own chosen special master. Lawyers won’t touch him.

    No, I think his offer is just lipstick on the Smithfield hog.

    IMO

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. RE: “Perhaps Ukraine exchanging Donetsk and Luhansk for Mariupol west to Crimea.”

      I think the secession of the four oblasts is a done deal. However, many observers have been expecting Russia to push westward from Kherson to Odesa, cutting off what remains of Ukraine from the Black Sea. The status of Odesa, accordingly, is a potential point of negotiation.

      Also, should the Duma formally annex the four oblasts, any further Ukrainian shelling in those districts will prove problematic, but could inspire diplomacy.

      Whether or not Trump is the right person for the job, the US/Nato has no choice but to accept the status quo, or lose the opportunity to influence any future outcome of the conflict.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Secession?

        Accession is more accurate. The vote showed 99% plus in one of the 4. The rest in the nineties.

        There are no elections that attain that kind of results except sham ones. IMO

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. RE: “There are no elections that attain that kind of results except sham ones.”

          So what? The voters in the oblasts reject your speculation.

          After the Duma votes, do you want to go to war to take the oblasts back?

          Like

          Reply

          2. The Russians are too incompetent to even stage a fake referendum. There is no world in which 99% of the people of an area agree on anything let alone something this consequential.

            The referenda and annexation are the illegal flailing of a losing regime. NATO has the right policy – ignore such nonsense. And keep sending Ukraine all the munitions it needs to defend itself.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. “The voters in the oblasts reject your speculation.”

            A hastily called referendum in a war zone with ballots delivered by armed soldiers is suspect in my book.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. RE: “A hastily called referendum in a war zone with ballots delivered by armed soldiers is suspect in my book.”

            Ok. So, why trust your own suspicions over the documented statements of participants in the referendum?

            Like

          2. I have not seen evidence of fraud. Certainly not enough to change the outcome. So what if the real results were only 80% in favor instead of 95%?

            I realize you and Len very much want the referendum to be a sham, but then Trump very much wanted a different outcome too.

            Like

          4. Are you equating our election to the one in Ukraine? You have pounded home the ballot harvesting myths here, but armed soldiers delivering, exiting, and picking up ballots is no problem.

            Cute, but pointless.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. How much difference is there really between ballots harvested by soldiers and ballots harvested by a Democrat volunteer who is also your social worker or your kid’s teacher?

            It’s a difference in degree, not in kind.

            It’s a bad idea in both cases.

            In any case, perhaps the numbers are off a bit, but not enough to change the outcome. The people of the Oblasts want to be Russian.

            Do we respect their choice or not?

            Like

          6. “ Do we respect their choice or not?”

            Choice? Was it their choice to have Russians invade in 2014? And up the invasion in 2022?

            Putin was after all of Ukraine ever since he took power. He has so stated when he argued that Ukraine was not even a sovereign state. Donbas was a pretense. But as the invasion turned into a debacle for him, he swiftly decided to hold a referendum with little notice and then takeover within a day of the results.

            I am merely voicing my opinion. I don’t wish the election to be a sham. I would have preferred it wasn’t.

            Liked by 2 people

          7. Uh, Putin offered peace in the first week of the invasion if Ukraine granted independence to 2 of the 4 Oblasts that just voted to join Russia. He said form the beginning that he wanted a neutral buffer between Russia and NATO. Zelensky refused to talk.

            There do you get the idea he wanted all of Ukraine? It’s a little early to start revising history.

            Like

          10. According to your link, the takeover of Crimea was mostly ignored by the West.

            Really? It was big news here.

            And I think the declaration that Ukraine was a Nazi state has been refuted quite successfully and often.

            Bottom line though, is that a peace offering at gunpoint is no peace offering.

            Russia gave up any rights to Ukraine decades ago. Ukraine coughed up nukes with a treaty that Russia promised never to attack.

            Liked by 2 people

          11. The point it that it was not Putin’s plan to take over Ukraine. It was not even his plan to take 2 of the 4 oblasts that just voted to join Russia.

            So, tens of thousands of lives and a permanently damaged foreign policy just made things worse.

            Like

          12. You know Putin’s plan how?

            He told us in speeches that he did not consider Ukraine a sovereign state. He droned on about centuries of revisionist history.

            You really think that just taking Crimea, then 2 followed by 4 oblasts in an orchestrated “separatist movement” was the end all. He is still bombing Kyiv.

            Conscripting 300,000 reservists, prison inmates and countless mercenaries are not the moves of a man who just wanted a few slivers.

            Liked by 2 people

          13. We know because he told us what he would accept at the beginning.

            Whether his goals were just or not, what was the US National interest in getting a lot of Russians and Ukrainians killed and stoking a generation of hatred for no change in the outcome?

            We could have just let the Russians hold their referendum a year ago and accepted the outcome peacefully.

            Like

          14. No change in the outcome?

            Why do you keep saying that? Month after month. A lot has happened since Donald Trump declared Putin a “genius” for getting a whole country at the nominal cost of some ineffectual sanctions.

            If you had had your way, the fascist regime would have been strengthened in Russia and they would be licking their lips looking for the next place to expand. Now, thanks to the ferocity of the Ukrainian resistance, Putin will be lucky to survive let alone attack others.

            Liked by 1 person

          16. “Are there any other regions where the people want to be reunited with Russia?”

            Donbas was NOT such a region. Russians have NEVER been a majority there.

            What part of “pretext” do you choose to ignore? There are plenty of ethnic Russian in the countries that border Russia. And just like Hitler did, when he runs of plausible pretexts, he will just invade without one.

            Like

          18. Had we not committed to back the Ukraine, it is very unlikely they would have refused to let the Donbass and Crimea go peacefully, or at least with minimal loss of life.

            Like

          19. So? I suspect that Zelensky knows Putin better than any of us. He knows that Putin wants a lackey state. That is why he sent his best special forces to take Kyiv and assassinate the president on day one.

            When that failed, he sent the ill-fated 40 mile convoy. When that failed, he started chipping away at oblasts to the north. When that failed, he held a referendum with a weeks notice, under gunpoint, with a quick vote at home to grab Donbas and a bit more.

            Putin misread everything. Yes, Ukraine needed help, and it was given to them. NATO and Europe needs a buffer from Putin more than Putin needs one against them. NATO expansion to the Baltic States, among others, was not done because they trusted Russia, that you can be sure of. And now we know that is with good reason.

            Russian atrocities, nothing new, but against Europeans they have gotten a lot more notice and verification than in deep territories like Chechnya or adventures like Syria. I doubt few nations would ever not fight to the end rather than seeing civilians rounded up, shot and tortured to death and buried in mass graves.

            Liked by 2 people

          20. He attacked the capital right away. Last I saw on a map, Kyiv was not in the region he wanted.

            Before and during the invasion in 2022, there were many postings of Putin speeches that more than indicated empire building. He droned on about the history of Ukraine with regards to Russia. He denied their sovereignty.

            He fueled the separatist movement into something bigger, then sent his military into Ukraine in 2014. Offering peace at the end of a spear in 2022 is nothing more than extortion on a grand scale.

            Liked by 2 people

          21. When you seek to compel an enemy to accept peace terms, you attack what is important to him, not what is important to you.

            Putin would not publicly set terms for peace and then not accept agreement to them.

            Like

          22. “When you seek to compel an enemy to accept peace terms, you attack what is important to him, not what is important to you.”

            Putin made it clear from the beginning that the war was about regime-change. Thus the initial thrust aimed at the seat of government. That fact does not go away because his attempt failed.

            Liked by 1 person

          23. “Putin would not publicly set terms for peace”…

            Putin NEVER wanted peace. He wanted land and the power that goes with it. He was offered peace PRIOR to the invasion and said one big, fat NYET. If he wanted peace, and then had it offered to him BEFORE invading, why did he still go to war on a peaceful neighbor?

            Liked by 1 person

          25. Don, I don’t understand the world view of an armed robber, but that does not mean he has the right to steal.

            Perhaps his worldview is complex, but his actions are pretty simple. He wants Ukraine and he will kill tens of thousands, including his own citizens, to get it. So far he has done just that.

            Liked by 1 person

          27. “I see no evidence he wants more of Ukraine than he said from the beginning.”

            So a robber who says to you at gunpoint “Give me half your money!” is not a robber?

            Like

          29. “It is very much a matter of point of view, the Ethnic Russians see it as demanding the return of what was stolen from them by the Soviets”

            You need to learn more of the actual history of this region. You obviously know very little. Here is a thumbnail version – the Soviet policy was for Russians to migrate to Ukrainian territory as part of their effort to devour it. That goes all the way back to the genocide of the Holodomor. Before the USSR, Donbas was NOT ethnically Russian. Look it up.

            Like

          31. Then why would he add two more oblasts and the port cities on the coast towards Odessa and Crimea.

            You might want to tell Ukrainians in Kherson that the Russian occupiers are just tourists.

            Liked by 1 person

          32. They asked.

            The initial demands were before the costs inflicted on the Russian and Ukranian people.

            Zelensky should have taken the deal before the situation on the ground changed.

            Like

          33. And you think Putin would have stopped with just two oblasts and Crimea. They were not even linked. Why do you think he is spreading the war along the coasts all the way to Odessa?

            Putin already trashed a treaty to not attack Ukraine in exchange for nukes. Why would anyone believe him? Or even should?

            Liked by 1 person

          35. You do realize that just because a dictator says I want a big, valuable chunk of your country, does not mean he will get it.

            I wrote earlier, that the tactic he tried, starting a separatist movement in a small area then sending in troops to “protect” Russians, was used successfully in Georgia and Moldova. Ukraine under Zelensky knew the goal was not just the two oblasts.

            Like you said, fool me once…

            Liked by 1 person

          36. “I see you, Len and Paul engaging in a great deal of mind reading of a man who does not have a world view any of us really understand.”

            Who gives a shit about Putin’s world view? It is OUR world view that counts for us. In our view we prefer democracy and freedom over tyranny. In our view, aggression should not be allowed to succeed.

            You do not need “mind reading” to recognize evil. Actions speak far louder than words.

            Like

          38. “Then respect the referendum”

            The referendum is NOT “democracy” for very obvious reasons. You want Putin to prevail so you are ready to accept the fig leaf that he is wearing to justify his splendid little war.

            Like

          40. “The majorities are sufficiently large that the results can be trusted. Remember that there were observers.”

            Following pro forma procedures is dandy. (If you consider armed soldiers knocking on doors with ballots to be an acceptable procedure). Illegally organizing an election is not. Forcing away and/or murdering the people who would vote the other way is not. A total and desperate fraud from start to finish and very obviously so. Don’t agree with me? Maybe you agree with the hundreds of thousands of Russians fleeing their country rather than defend such fraud? Or not.

            Like

          41. “The people of the Oblasts want to be Russian.”

            No, they don’t. None of these four Oblasts has ever been ethnic Russian majority, let alone 99%. These referenda do not reflect the will of the people murdered nor the millions driven away by Russian sponsored terrorists. They do not reflect the will of the people in the Ukraine controlled areas of the Oblasts – people who have welcomed the return of sovereign forces. The votes are a complete fraud and your eagerness to deny this obvious truth is absurd.

            You seem to have a very odd idea about people if you think that – in general – they would prefer life in a dysfunctional fascist dictatorship versus life in a European facing democracy.

            Liked by 2 people

          44. “From March”

            Uh, you said Putin offered peace in the first week of the invasion. Not true. The offer came after the initial blitzkrieg stalled. This report is dated March 19th.

            And more to the point the conditions for peace amounted to abject surrender by Ukraine which would have to give up its territory and its sovereignty.

            Bottom line, you do not get to portray Putin as some sort of frustrated peacemaker based on the actual facts of his (1) refusal to accept reasonable accommodation negotiated on his behalf before launching his criminal invasion, and (2) his egregiously one-sided offer of a settlement even after his invasion had failed to achieve its aims.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. Ukraine’s stated war aims are to recover ALL its territory in accordance with its legal borders of 1991. That includes Crimea. With Russia losing badly why would Ukraine given up on those LEGITIMATE war aims?

        All of you thinking on this question seems to be based on the idea that Russia’s military can prevail. That is far from obvious. Wars are ultimately political. There is no clearer sign that Russia is losing / has lost than the hundreds of thousands of men leaving the country.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. RE: “All of you thinking on this question seems to be based on the idea that Russia’s military can prevail.”

          It can — politically, economically, militarily. The notion that Russia is losing the war is pure delusion.

          Like

          Reply

          2. A nation does not call for a general mobilization to bolster a failed invasion if it is holding the best cards. Russia has already brought in the Wagner Group (and they have taken massive casualties), mercenaries and is emptying prisons for cannon fodder.

            These are the kinds of actions taken by a desperate country trying to defend itself from an invasion, not the invaders.

            Now, Russia has had a tenuous hold on much of the Donbas for 8 years ever since they planted a phony insurrection supplanted by its military. So they are dug in and are close to the border so Russian pilots can fly in real quick, unload and skeedaddle before the going gets rough.

            Ukraine, the US, NATO and even China and India do not want Putin to smash and grab neighboring nations like a punk thief. The Donbas fighting will go on for months or years, and the attrition will be wearing on the Russians as more and more sons come home in body bags. It worked for the Afghans and it will eventually for the Ukrainians.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. How many times do you have to be told that McGregor is a Puin lackey with no legitimate standing in ANY forum. Yet here he is again.

            I sighted previously where he is considered in the grand scheme of things. Not by MSM, but by those who are much smarter and better connected to reality that he is.

            Continuing to repeat the same thing over and over does not make it true; it is a sign of INSANITY. His and possibly yours.

            Like

  3. I usually question the veracity of anything from PJMedia based on their historical record of, for lack of a better description, FERTILIZER. But I read through the post and they had quotes from TFG’s “social” media. Fair enough. Quotes actually lend credence to pieces like this.

    HOWEVER, when I got to this line … “from someone he fears and respects “… everything else was shot to hell. Putin does not fear nor respect Mr. Trump (working on my civility here, Don.). He views him as just another lackey that he convince of anything, including the sky is green and the sun rises in the West.

    Negotiating skills of Trump includes lawsuits, delays and bankruptcy filings. Also, not paying contracted workers for work performed.

    Sorry Mr. Trump. While it is admirable to offer assistance, you might want to focus on your personal interests (as usual), including lawsuits in NY, potential criminal liability in Georgia, documents kept that aren’t yours, but ours, and the several other issues your legal teams are dealing with at this time.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. It wouldn’t matter if Trump was the Queen Mary and could easily deescalate the war on agreeable terms, Democrats would never allow it. Just look at all of the Biden reversals of any and all Trump policy and the “committee” conveniently finishing up just in time for midterms as a barometer of their hatred for anything Trump good or bad. I didn’t like his ego but most policies were spot on, the border for example, and look where we are now. Total invasion.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Trump cancelled a boatload of Obama directives, too.

      The border is a problem that we have wrestled with for decades. As posited not long ago, if we really wanted to solve it, we could. Just jail anyone caught hiring an undocumented worker. Multinational CEO’s to the local lawn service.

      Even Trump was employing illegals at his resorts while he was president and bitching about the border.

      Honestly, it is as if we really don’t care except to campaign on it every few years. Cheap, compliant labor is what we want. So here we are.

      BTW the committee doesn’t expect to issue a final report until the end of December.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    2. RE: “I didn’t like his ego but most policies were spot on, the border for example, and look where we are now. Total invasion.”

      I take your point, but for me Trump’s outsized ego has always seemed a feature, not a bug. The great men of history all had great egos; hence, it was always possible that Trump might live up to that potential.

      He didn’t in his first term, despite some successes. But he might in a second term, sort of on the model of Winston Churchill.

      I’d roll the dice again for Trump, given the chance.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Outsized ego?

        I would say the opposite. Maybe the most needy and insecure individual to every become President. Desperate for approval. He did not just have a fair turnout for his inaugural. Oh no. He had the biggest turnout ever! Far bigger than Obama’s. And that was at the beginning of his term. It only went downhill from there.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. RE: “Outsized ego?”

          Ego is the characteristic Mr. Smith brought up, hence the one I chose to comment on. Psychoanalysis doesn’t impress me. Those who practice it outside of medical therapy are almost always wrong.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Well, you are doing about the same amount of psychoanalysis as I am. You are assuming a “great ego” is behind all of his nastiness. I think it is weakness.

            I may well be wrong but nowhere have I ever seen anything except weakness masked by ridiculous bluster. He surrounds himself with yes-men and family members. Strong advisers have all been replaced. He is not capable of accepting any kind of challenge. Weak. Very weak.

            It is all moot. And not worth further discussion. There will not be a second Trump term and he will go down in history as a disaster for this country.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “You are assuming a ‘great ego’ is behind all of his nastiness.”

            I didn’t say so. You are jousting at windmills.

            Like

        1. RE: “Winston Churchill’s second term as Prime Minister was pretty inconsequential.”

          Not the point, really. Churchill was a controversial figure who lost popular support, then regained it.

          Like

          Reply

          1. It may not be the point you had in mind, but I reacted accurately to what you wrote.

            And since we are trying extra hard to be nice, I will not address the suggestion that Trump is in some way or any way anything like Winston Churchill.

            Liked by 1 person

    1. “Desperate asylum seekers?”

      You have to be desperate to uproot your family, walk many hundreds of miles, and take your chances among hostile people. So yes, desperate.

      The obvious explanation for these people to get some sort of help from government programs is one you do not care to acknowledge – they are exploited by the people who employ them with sub-standard, illegal wages and working conditions.

      As it has always been, the problem of illegal immigration could be easily solved by punishing the real villains – the people who lure them here with illegal employment.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Or punish the very government that lures them here with payouts from the US taxpayers pockets. The Biden admin has been complicit in importing millions of welfare seekers costing taxpayers billions. Vote Republican in 2022 and 2024.

        Like

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s