Since FLBear won't go where we have been discussing the Russia-Ukraine conflict, I will repost this again here.

"I would like to present a few thoughts:

For starters, it's simple historical fact that Putin invaded neighboring countries during the terms of W, Obama, and Biden, yet never did so during Trump's first term, even though Trump killed Russian soldiers in Libya. There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump ever made any decision for the benefit or advantage of Putin, so claiming so more than slightly diminishes the credibility of any person trying that tack;

Second, while it is clear that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia is the heart of the present conflict, there are dimensions to Russia-Ukraine relations where Zelensky either mishandled the situation or contributed to the hostile atmosphere which led to the military invasion. While Trump certainly was wrong to claim Ukraine "started" the war, there are elements which must be addressed in any peace talks if the thing is going to actually last and not just be a breather between wars;

Third, the war has certainly not gone the way anybody wanted up to now. Hundreds of thousands of people are dead, the region is in economic ruins, and the instability caused by the conflict raises doubts about the entire region's security for the foreseeable future;

And fourth, Zelensky enjoyed emotional support from many people when Russia initially invaded, but he has since been exposed as rather a fragile ego and worse, he doesn't seem to feel obligated to even account for all the hundreds of billions of dollars - mostly in cash - that came his way. Yet Z seems to think he's entitled to be in power, have tons of money, and because - Putin - everyone should just give him whatever he wants.

So what we have here are three main players:

Putin, who thought invading Ukraine would turn out a lot different than what he got. If nothing else, Russia has been exposed as far from the military hegemon controlling the center of the Eurasian continent. Putin needs to wrap up the conflict in Ukraine so he can build up his military and economy.

Zelensky, who is slowly beginning to learn that the moral support he enjoyed when the war began does not mean he can beat a Russian force determined to stay in Ukraine - Zelensky simply does not have the men needed to survive a prolonged war of attrition. The war has also destroyed Ukraine's economy and infrastructure, so that even if Russia packed up and left, Ukraine would need help from other countries to survive.

Trump, who sees the situation as an opportunity to both establish a lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine, and also gain advantage on multiple levels for the US. The purpose for the proposed rare minerals deal includes creating a US stake in Ukraine's survival, to limit potential future Russian aggression, to punish Zelensky personally for his arrogance in assuming he could take hundreds of billions of US money without so much as a 'here's where it went' report, and giving Putin a fig leaf to be able to end the war without looking like he lost outright. Keep in mind that Trump, being ineligible to run for re-election in 2028, has no reason to worry about the political fallout from the negotiations. Trump either gets a deal he likes or he can walk away with no personal downside as he sees it."

(apologies for those who already saw it on the other thread).

boognish_bear said:

---

In an extraordinary display of public support, heads of state, heads of government, and foreign ministers from all over Europe and Canada are posting in support of Ukraine in response to the Oval Office meeting with Trump, Zelenskyy, and Vance. pic.twitter.com/Om4V28hgo5

— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) February 28, 2025

---

All the folks being defunded of our taxpayer's money through USAID. Not even a Thank You... remember that President Trump. Claw those bucks back

J.R. said:

---

whiterock said:

---

J.R. said:

---

whiterock said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

canoso said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

NEW: Despite the Trump administration informing federal agencies that responding to Elon Musk's "What did you do last week?" email is voluntary, Musk is doubling down on his threats to federal workers, saying those who do not respond will be terminated.https://t.co/FBwh7viL7U

— ABC News (@ABC) February 25, 2025

---

The federal workers I know at church are vexed about all this.

First, Musk says they have to do this. Second, many of their agency heads say they don't have to do this. Third, Trump says maybe or maybe not. Fourth, Musk says they have to do this.

Pure incompetent chaos.

Several of them voted for Trump and are complaining about the chaos.

All of them would like to be treated like human beings doing their jobs. They don't understand why the Musk Administration isn't treating them this way.

So, the idea is that the replies of these hundreds of thousands of workers will be fed into an AI program, which will decide their fate? All their performance evaluations, etc., wlll be irrelevant?

There's no excuse for treating people this way.

---

If they're doing their jobs, what's the difficulty with mentioning 5 meaningful things they accomplished in an entire work week? Unless they're doing something other than their jobs.......

---

Why does DOGE need to know these things? And I can think of many difficulties of sharing a number of different government activities to a non government agency. Intel, law enforcement, defense, etc. They have new bosses at the top. Let them do their job for their areas of responsibility.

---

You are so overthinking this.

1) it's an opportunity for all federal employees to comply with a simple, legal, non-ideological task. Only a die-hard neverTrumper could contrive a reason NOT to reply.
2) it's an opportunity to test the theory that there are hundreds of thousands of civil servants working from home who are actually not working at their federal job at all, not even reading their emails.

Man, trust me, no reasonable bureaucrat would have a problem doing such a simple thing. There is literally no legal, professional, or security reason one cannot write 5 sentences which comply with the request, particularly when one's job is on the line. Hell a large number of them write tomes saying nothing all da, /every day.

And if 99% of the civil service complies, fine. what's the harm in proving they actually read their emails?

---

while I have no problem whatsoever rooting out waste,, fraud and abuse in govt. I did it in the corp. world. However, I have a serious problem with the methodology. There is a chain of command in any organization which should be followed.
and that chain of command, until 30 days ago, believed it had a moral duty to resist lawful orders from an elected POTUS, if it did not like them. Had he entered and tried to negotiate with him, his agenda would be done. Instead, he did what he had to do - decapitate insubordinate civil service leadership structures.

It shouldn't be done via email and "results" and terminations should not evaluated by AI which is proposed.
This is hardly the first time people have been fired via email. Neither is it the first time that performance evaluations have been done by AI. I would submit to you that AI use in HR functions will expand, not contract.

are/sb performances appraisals on file to begin the process (stack ranking).
The civil service is stacked & racked every year. I knew exactly what my number was every, single, time. Also knew what was the headspace.

You tell the person in charge of each organization to cut 20% or whatever the number is.
That's exactly what they're doing! - appointing agency leadership, to execute on an already existing plan to reduce and restructure!

It should be done in person as each person deserves dignity and thorough thought during the process.
A battlefield commander does not worry too much about dignity and deliberation. He/she will relieve and replace ineffective leadership, on the spur of the moment standing in a trench with mud on his/her boots. Similarly, any commander taking over a unit for which the previous commander was relieved for cause will almost always clean the decks and bring in entirely new leadership. Bad culture is bad culture. You do not have time to ponder & divine who are the good ones and who are the bad ones, and hope you are right. To ensure you change culture immediately, you must replace en masse and move them ALL out. They will find roles elsewhere.

Each manager should be responsible to have those in person terminations whenever possible, no AI and email. Very chicken chit. This cannot be done in 48hrs nor should it. It must be pragmatic and well thought out. This is an absolute chit show and is vastly unprofessional. Just the simple fact that they are ramming this through is problematic. I have had the unfortunate task of firing many people and laying off thousands. I always did it face to face to my direct reports and ensured each manager/director/VP had those conversations with their people affected face to face. That in my opinion is the only way to do it. Yes, the govt needs to be right sized, to be sure, just do it as thoughtfully and pragmatic as possible.
You are describing how one replaces a problem employee, not transformation of a 2m person organization.

---

You also never had to worry about politics, about media cycles, support from your own party, obstacles from the other party, court orders and drawn out litigation before partisan judges, etc..... You didn't have to worry about time, for any other reason than how it affected cash flow. Most presidents, on the other hand, have a bout 6 months to get done what they want to do before they get bogged down.

Mostly, though, you (and in fairness also most critics of what we are watching) are completely and utterly wrong that this is a helter-skelter chit-show. It's exactly the opposite. You are mistaking the chaos for a cause rather than what it actually is - an effect. The changes are upsetting applecarts, causing wailing and gnashing of teeth. Good. That means the changes are effective.

Trump got his ass handed to him in his first term. He learned his lessons and spent 4 years planning how to make the most of his 2nd term. His team has been working on this for years, wargaming the lawfare, etc.... And, it has to be said, neverTrumpers like you severely underestimated the man. The Swamp never dreamed anyone would be so bold, much less Orange Man Bad, who is smarter than virtually every single one of his critics. As a result, he has his opponents by the gonads. They were completely unprepared for what he unleashed on them. and it's just getting started.

---

well, you admitted you are or have been a govt. employee. Nuff said. Can't swing it in the real world, feed at the govt teet. please, man.

---

lol so I've been in the private sector for 30 years, built over a hundred millions of dollars of business for myself and others, but because I served in the CIA for 10 years I can't make it in the real world.

No wonder you don't understand politics.

whiterock said:

---

J.R. said:

---

whiterock said:

---

J.R. said:

---

whiterock said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

canoso said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

NEW: Despite the Trump administration informing federal agencies that responding to Elon Musk's "What did you do last week?" email is voluntary, Musk is doubling down on his threats to federal workers, saying those who do not respond will be terminated.https://t.co/FBwh7viL7U

— ABC News (@ABC) February 25, 2025

---

The federal workers I know at church are vexed about all this.

First, Musk says they have to do this. Second, many of their agency heads say they don't have to do this. Third, Trump says maybe or maybe not. Fourth, Musk says they have to do this.

Pure incompetent chaos.

Several of them voted for Trump and are complaining about the chaos.

All of them would like to be treated like human beings doing their jobs. They don't understand why the Musk Administration isn't treating them this way.

So, the idea is that the replies of these hundreds of thousands of workers will be fed into an AI program, which will decide their fate? All their performance evaluations, etc., wlll be irrelevant?

There's no excuse for treating people this way.

---

If they're doing their jobs, what's the difficulty with mentioning 5 meaningful things they accomplished in an entire work week? Unless they're doing something other than their jobs.......

---

Why does DOGE need to know these things? And I can think of many difficulties of sharing a number of different government activities to a non government agency. Intel, law enforcement, defense, etc. They have new bosses at the top. Let them do their job for their areas of responsibility.

---

You are so overthinking this.

1) it's an opportunity for all federal employees to comply with a simple, legal, non-ideological task. Only a die-hard neverTrumper could contrive a reason NOT to reply.
2) it's an opportunity to test the theory that there are hundreds of thousands of civil servants working from home who are actually not working at their federal job at all, not even reading their emails.

Man, trust me, no reasonable bureaucrat would have a problem doing such a simple thing. There is literally no legal, professional, or security reason one cannot write 5 sentences which comply with the request, particularly when one's job is on the line. Hell a large number of them write tomes saying nothing all da, /every day.

And if 99% of the civil service complies, fine. what's the harm in proving they actually read their emails?

---

while I have no problem whatsoever rooting out waste,, fraud and abuse in govt. I did it in the corp. world. However, I have a serious problem with the methodology. There is a chain of command in any organization which should be followed.
and that chain of command, until 30 days ago, believed it had a moral duty to resist lawful orders from an elected POTUS, if it did not like them. Had he entered and tried to negotiate with him, his agenda would be done. Instead, he did what he had to do - decapitate insubordinate civil service leadership structures.

It shouldn't be done via email and "results" and terminations should not evaluated by AI which is proposed.
This is hardly the first time people have been fired via email. Neither is it the first time that performance evaluations have been done by AI. I would submit to you that AI use in HR functions will expand, not contract.

are/sb performances appraisals on file to begin the process (stack ranking).
The civil service is stacked & racked every year. I knew exactly what my number was every, single, time. Also knew what was the headspace.

You tell the person in charge of each organization to cut 20% or whatever the number is.
That's exactly what they're doing! - appointing agency leadership, to execute on an already existing plan to reduce and restructure!

It should be done in person as each person deserves dignity and thorough thought during the process.
A battlefield commander does not worry too much about dignity and deliberation. He/she will relieve and replace ineffective leadership, on the spur of the moment standing in a trench with mud on his/her boots. Similarly, any commander taking over a unit for which the previous commander was relieved for cause will almost always clean the decks and bring in entirely new leadership. Bad culture is bad culture. You do not have time to ponder & divine who are the good ones and who are the bad ones, and hope you are right. To ensure you change culture immediately, you must replace en masse and move them ALL out. They will find roles elsewhere.

Each manager should be responsible to have those in person terminations whenever possible, no AI and email. Very chicken chit. This cannot be done in 48hrs nor should it. It must be pragmatic and well thought out. This is an absolute chit show and is vastly unprofessional. Just the simple fact that they are ramming this through is problematic. I have had the unfortunate task of firing many people and laying off thousands. I always did it face to face to my direct reports and ensured each manager/director/VP had those conversations with their people affected face to face. That in my opinion is the only way to do it. Yes, the govt needs to be right sized, to be sure, just do it as thoughtfully and pragmatic as possible.
You are describing how one replaces a problem employee, not transformation of a 2m person organization.

---

You also never had to worry about politics, about media cycles, support from your own party, obstacles from the other party, court orders and drawn out litigation before partisan judges, etc..... You didn't have to worry about time, for any other reason than how it affected cash flow. Most presidents, on the other hand, have a bout 6 months to get done what they want to do before they get bogged down.

Mostly, though, you (and in fairness also most critics of what we are watching) are completely and utterly wrong that this is a helter-skelter chit-show. It's exactly the opposite. You are mistaking the chaos for a cause rather than what it actually is - an effect. The changes are upsetting applecarts, causing wailing and gnashing of teeth. Good. That means the changes are effective.

Trump got his ass handed to him in his first term. He learned his lessons and spent 4 years planning how to make the most of his 2nd term. His team has been working on this for years, wargaming the lawfare, etc.... And, it has to be said, neverTrumpers like you severely underestimated the man. The Swamp never dreamed anyone would be so bold, much less Orange Man Bad, who is smarter than virtually every single one of his critics. As a result, he has his opponents by the gonads. They were completely unprepared for what he unleashed on them. and it's just getting started.

---

well, you admitted you are or have been a govt. employee. Nuff said. Can't swing it in the real world, feed at the govt teet. please, man.

---

lol so I've been in the private sector for 30 years, built over a hundred millions of dollars of business for myself and others, but because I served in the CIA for 10 years I can't make it in the real world.

No wonder you don't understand politics.

---

Thanks for your service. My brother was CIA also

The fact that the Epstein files haven’t yet been released demonstrates that the President doesn’t yet have operational control of the DOJ and FBI.

It could take a while to establish, or as with his first term, it might never be established.

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) February 28, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

BREAKING:

Starmer meets with Zelensky and tells him Ukraine “has full backing across the UK.”

He also said that both the UK and Ukraine want to achieve a “lasting peace” pic.twitter.com/wbGWfjfWrX

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) March 1, 2025

---

the full backing.. whats that like 3000 troops and a round of fish and chips for everybody?

I think this is a better and fuller look at the discussions with Ukraine from Marco

Secretary of State Marco Rubio just gave one of the BEST interviews I have watched in defense of President Trump's Ukraine and Russia strategy.

President Trump picked a seasoned media veteran like Rubio for moments like these, here is the full interview! pic.twitter.com/ETaBLVVUHE

— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) March 1, 2025

Redbrickbear said:

---

It's nice that there are at least 2 elected Republicans who don't worship at the Altar of Zelenskyy. It doesn't take an ounce of moral courage to continue sending billions to Ukraine so the killing never ends, but it does takes moral courage to put an end to it and deliver peace. https://t.co/unayK7WQxR

— Andrew Surabian (@Surabees) February 28, 2025

---

Exactly