I mean, the secretary of state has that power, it's just that in previous administrations they never used it widely. It's another one of those norms that are being broken while still being legal.
Yeah, but if Denmark just allows the base to stay open as it is, they risk a Crimea scenario where Russia basically opened the gates of their Sevastopol base and took over the whole Peninsula before anyone could do anything about it.
Yeah, I figured most of these people knew what they were doing when they supported Trump, but somehow after a decade of his bullshit (and really, all the decades before that too), they're still surprised he's a fraud?
Or are they just angry that they weren't in the pump and dump group chat that Trump is obviously running?
So a Ukrainian news paper isn't good enough? I can find other sources for the same story if you like. Or you can search for stories that explore the background of Johnson's sudden Kyiv trip yourself.
I didn't ever say the Russians were the good guys. I'm saying the West is happy to keep Ukrainians fighting and dying for geopolitical reasons. Zelensky was elected on a platform of making a deal and ending the war, and he wasn't allowed to do that by the West.
Eventually there will be a peace, and even though it would be fair that Ukraine gets all its territory back, realistically that's not going to happen (and if it did, there's the question of what happens to all the Russian speakers in those areas). The deal he could've gotten right after the failed Russian invasion would've been better than whatever he can get now, especially with Trump now basically being in Putin's side.
It's just a case of the US continuing to push too far thinking you can just beat Russia with better technology, even though history has shown that Russian leaders are perfectly happy to just throw men into the battle until the enemy runs out of ammo.
They were close to a deal during a relative high water mark (Ukraine had just taken Kharkiv back and a huge chunk of the east). They've only gone backwards since and whatever deal they can get now will most likely be worse.
There's very little upside to attending a protest in the PRC, and a huge downside (cfr. 1986). The calculation is different in the US, obviously, although Trump is potentially changing this as well. They're just using their past experience and they're trying to keep you safe.
You just need to make a decision for yourself, are you willing to go to a protest now, potentially be imprisoned, deported to China, or do you just focus on getting a job and hoping it blows over. In a lot of ways it's a prisoner's dilemma: if you're only a small group protesting, you'll be crushed and nothing will change. If everyone's protesting and organising some kind of resistance that can't be ignored, you can win. The tricky part is making everyone come to the same conclusion at the same time to maximise chances of success.
The US could just stop sending weapons to Israel and the fighting will stop too. As for Ukraine, Zelensky has tried to make deals with Russia before and the West told him not to because they promised they'd continue backing him with more weapons that would give them the edge, which the US is obviously reneging on now (which, to be fair, is something Trump sort of said he'd do, so you could argue that's been democratically decided).
Looking forward to seeing a bunch of octogenarians trying to figure out Twitter on their phones.