this post was submitted on 11 May 2025
469 points (98.6% liked)

politics

23473 readers
3049 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump, who publicly touts himself as a “dealmaker-in-chief,” is privately upset at his failure to strike deals to stop the two wars he has promised to end, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.

At a closed-door meeting with top donors at Mar-a-Lago last week, Trump admitted that the frustration he feels from his inability to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine keeps him up at night, people in the room told the WSJ.

He said that Russian President Vladimir Putin, who Trump has frequently claimed is negotiating in good faith, has been driving an especially hard bargain. Putin wants “the whole thing,” Trump said, referring to Ukraine.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Transtronaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The deal thing is a smokescreen. The real reason he's upset is that he badly and urgently wants to end a war. It's the only chance in hell he'd ever get a Nobel peace prize, and in his delusional mind, he's still competing with Obama.

[–] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I already thought Obama getting a Nobel peace prize after his massive drone warfare in the Middle East and Africa made that whole organization a joke. Trump getting it would be so much of a step beyond "a joke" that I don't even know what to call it.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

If you think drones are somehow more murderous and indiscriminate than artillery shells or mortar rounds, you're delusional. Also, Trump in his first term massively escalated the use of drones and also changed the rules of engagement to no longer require planners to attempt to minimize civilian casualties.

[–] Transtronaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh, for sure. I'm not saying they should have given one to Obama. That and Kissinger are why it's not completely unthinkable that Trump might actually get one somehow.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Obama and Kissinger are not even close to being the same. Kissinger deserved life in prison. Obama was just doing the same old shit every American president has done in the past century.

Never said they were anything like the same. Just that neither of them had done anything particularly worthy of a Nobel peace prize. As you say, every American president in the past century would have gotten one, were that the case.