Small man syndrome often includes violence: verbal, physical, emotional, etc

No NATO for you, Cocaine Z man. Take the deal, Z man, and you can live to be in the history books as more than just a footnote.

Zelenskyy has consistently used Hitlerian military tactics, i.e., no retreat, no restraint, and an utter disregard for the lives of Ukrainian soldiers, which makes him a war criminal.
President Putin has exhibited utmost restraint in military tactics, saving Russian lives, despite the disinformation from the globalist media and the neocons disinforming President Trump regarding kill ratios and casualties.
I keep in the forefront what President Trump told Joe Rogan during the 2024 election paraphrasing, Do not take my comments on foreign policy literally…
PDJT has been trolling the Kellogs, Gorkas, etc, regarding what he knows and more importantly what he’s going to do in the geopolitical arena, a la Ukraine, Israel. He will not betray his base, US, at the end of the day.

Putin can win the peace by elaborating his 2022 proposal to let the contested Donbas states become independent.

All we had to do was negotiate over the meaning of independence: that it must mean genuine sovereignty of the people, secured in perpetuity by putting all necessary guarantees into the constitutions of the newly independent states.

But it doesn’t have to be us who pushes this. Putin could do it himself, and by doing so turn the current leftist moral world order on its head. Russia has a chance here to undo its current demonization by making itself the author of the new ideal for a “rules based international order.”

Let the people of a contested territory choose their own way forward, through what we would call an idealized republican democracy: a democracy (popular sovereignty) designed to maximize the individual sovereignty (the liberty) of the people.

This is the “republican form of government” that is guaranteed in Article IV section 4 of our own Constitution.

At the constitutional debates in New York, Alexander Hamilton summarized the concept of Republicanism in terms of its most critical element:

“The true principle of a republic, is that the people shall choose who shall govern them.”

Them he followed this simple statement with a clear manageable standard of adjudication:

“Representation [republicanism] is imperfect to the extent that the current of popular favor is checked.”

The most obvious way that the current of popular favor can be checked is by having insecure election processes where the outcome can be determined by vote fraud and election fraud.

Then instead of the people choosing who shall govern them, the choice is made by, as Stalin put it, whoever “counts the votes,” or stuffs the ballot box, or rigs the electronic voting machine, etc.

Any election system that is either intentionally or unnecessarily open to vote fraud undermines the guarantee that the will of the people (the current of popular favor) will prevail, and ought to be struck down as unconstitutional on that grounds.

A second obvious way to check the current of popular favor is by weaponizing the powers of government, striking at political opponents through the use of unequal justice (unequal protection of the laws), trying to brand them as criminals, to throw them in jail, block them from the ballot, or even brand a whole political movement as “insurrectionist,” by starting a Reichstag at the Capitol and framing the opposition for disrupting a Joint Session of Congress with a riot that was actually orchestrated by Democrats.

Trump, of course, has been fighting all of this, and is working very diligently to try to get election security in place, and to try to end weaponization of the powers of government, which were used so ruthlessly against him.

If we already have protection in our Constitution against these assaults on our system of government itself, how is it that numerous Democrat-run states are getting away with unnecessarily using electronic voting machines that are inherently vulnerable to mass election fraud, and getting away with no voter i.d., and mass mail-in voting, and even with the mass mailing of mail-in ballot applications that can all be voted by anyone who gets their hands on them with no verification at any point that they are the person named on the ballot?

It’s all because Hamilton’s concise and easy to adjudicate definition of republicanism was lost for 180 years, at least as seen by the Supreme Court.

Thus Justice Brennan, writing for the majority in the 1962 apportionment case Baker v. Carr, essentially declared that the republican guarantee is “nonjusticiable” (can’t be enforced by the courts) because the Supreme Court has no idea what republicanism is!

If they could figure that out, Brennan admits, then the guarantee might be enforceable, but what are the chances, at this late date, that a proposed requirement of republicanism can be found that is first “discoverable” (well enough grounded in the philosophy and documents of the founding era to be recognized by the Court as an established meaning of republicanism), while in addition constituting a “manageable standard of adjudication”?

He should have asked somebody:

“Hey you scholars out there: were there any such definitions being circulated in the founding era?”

“Maybe a stripped down definition of republicanism, formulated to be easily adjudicable, maybe presented by one of the authors of the constitution at the constitutional debates that were held to inform the public about the Constitution they were being asked to ratify?”

Even after the Supremes did finally discover Hamilton’s definition of republicanism eleven years later in the 1973 case Powell v McCormack, and then in US Term Limits v Thornton (1995), it still has never applied this definition to the guarantee of a republican form of government, which it is still holding to be non-justiciable.

Idiots .

The Russia Ukraine war provides a chance to fix this, not just for us, but for the world.

Republicanism is not the proper rule for a “rules based international order” in every case. When we defeated the Axis powers in WWII, we were under no obligation to say “ok guys, you are free to do whatever you as a people want to do again.”

No, they have to change. If what they want to do is attack us again then we can’t let them choose their own path.

That is the case with the Palestinian Arabs, and why they can never have their own state. They are collectively bent on mass murder and can never be allowed to do what they want.

But Ukraine and Russia have been very close, and in the Donbas states are very intermixed. Russia mass murdered 5-10 million Ukrainians during Stalins Holodomor, but as Solzhenitsyn urged everyone to understand: the Russians were also victims of the Bolsheviks, and were also gulaged and mass murdered by them.

Russians and Ukrainians have this in common, and what better way to overcome that common tyrannical past that by together agreeing to forge ahead with an ideal model of the sovereignty of the people, using popular sovereignty to protect individual sovereignty, the model we in America pioneered a quarter millennium ago, but have so far failed to perfect.

Doing so is now our great President Trump’s foremost domestic objective: to guarantee honest elections, to end weaponization, to secure free speech and the political rights of our sovereign people from all of the systematic attacks waged on our system of government by our usurpatious totalitarian Democrats.

This solution would give Russia the protective buffer it needs. These experiments in ideal republicanism, where the minority (whichever side that turns out to be) always retains the protections of maximum equal liberty, could be established as de-militarized neutral states, as in Russia’s 2022 plan.

Agreement would put pressure on the U.S. to live up to the same full small “r” republican ideal, alongv with Russia, and Europe, which is right now waging a multi-front war in the sovereignty of their own people, trying to replace them with new peoples via suicidal mass jihadist immigration, trying to shut them up and shut them out of elections, with front running parties now banned in France, Germany and Romania.

Instead of being demonized, Russia could flip the script, expose the real demons, and join with Trump as a moral champions.

Come on Russia. I have been hoping Trump would steer things this way, but the wheel is just as much in your hands. You can steer the world in this much better direction for yourself and for all of us.