clivestaples (u/clivestaples)

clivestaples commented on US economy unexpectedly sheds 92k jobs in February bbc.com/news/articles/cjd... · Posted by u/smartbit

cheesecompiler · 9 days ago

There is a significant majority of people in Canada who not only vocally decided to not go to US but discourage their friends from doing so too. People have judged me for driving through the states.

clivestaples · 9 days ago

I was surrounded by Canadians in Arizona (BC, Calgary) and Florida (Ontario) this winter. I could not tell a difference in the RV world (2021-present) which I thought was odd given all the boycotts I read about online.

clivestaples commented on Thousands of U.S. farmers have Parkinson's. They blame a deadly pesticide mlive.com/news/2025/12/th... · Posted by u/bikenaga

clivestaples · 3 months ago

I got shingles-ish rash after sitting in an outdoor jacuzzi in Salinas, California. Visited the urgent care and the Standard-trained doctor of immigrant farm laborers said it was related to the pesticides. Said he lost both parents in their 40s and suspects it was the indiscriminate spraying from the air in the 70/80/90s. Eye-opening and thought-provoking.

clivestaples commented on Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes harvard.edu/president/new... · Posted by u/impish9208

clivestaples · a year ago

Likely I'm very naive. But here goes... It seems that taxpayers fund a lot of research. This research is very valuable and lucrative. It finds its way into the hands of those who know how to profit from it. The taxpayer is again screwed paying exorbitant prices for said breakthroughs. Insulin is one area of interest to me and it very much seems to be the case in the diabetes world.

This was how NAFTA was sold. Move car manufacturing to Mexico and they will enjoy better living wages while we get more affordable cars. Except that I don't recall cars produced in Mexico ever getting more affordable. I'm sure corporate profits were great. Should probably look into this someday and see if my perception is correct.

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

yks · a year ago

The realistic answer is to say that Ukraine is going to be supplied with weapons for as long as needed, case closed. The whole Russian strategy after the initial blitz failure was to wait for Trump to get into power, who telegraphed to anyone with the brain, that he doesn't care about Ukraine and loves Putin very much. Russia can't do it forever, but it focused on appearing "strong" until the elections, the bet that paid off for them. Now imagine they were facing a prospect of non-friendly US administrations for decades, they would've already stopped.

clivestaples · a year ago

Realistically, does Ukraine have the manpower to sustain this tempo for years? If not, what countries should put boots on the ground?

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

picafrost · a year ago

It’s a war of attrition now, which is a war of will and logistics. Can anything be done differently? I don’t know, but I don’t think so. Isn’t victory under these circumstances making the war so costly that your opponent must find a way out?

The US was doing that. Russia’s will has won out over the US’s, that is a defeat, and we can only hope next time it isn’t the same.

clivestaples · a year ago

War of attrition. I thought we'd be further along after three years of sanctions and weapons but I wonder if Ukraine has the manpower to keep it up. From what I understand, Ukraine is drafting men ages 25-60 which may signal they need boots on the ground soon.

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

aerostable_slug · a year ago

Because this President campaigned on ending the long wars, which he opposed. I'm not sure where the confusion lies because Trump has been very clear about getting the US out of what he views as foreign entanglements.

I'm not passing judgement on it, just noting that what we're seeing is consistent with his campaign messaging.

clivestaples · a year ago

Yeah, agree that's what is happening. My original question wasn't rhetorical in nature. I would really like to know what would secure victory without escalating it to involve American troops on the ground and/or potentially a nuclear exchange.

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

watwut · a year ago

The thoughts are to NOT allow them to have time to rearm, get ready for another invasion, get another territory. And then again and again. That is all the peace right now would be - strategic pause so that Russia can get stronger for the next attack.

Also, Trump is supporting Russia while attacking Europe, Canada, Mexico, Greenland ... . Trump talks about annexing parts of Europe (Greenland) and annexing Canada.

clivestaples · a year ago

So by continuing to send more cash and weapons, it will eventually force Russia to retreat? I'm trying to understand what would secure victory.

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

CamperBob2 · a year ago

Give them the tools they need to finish the job.

This whole thing started when they willingly disarmed in return for security assurances that didn't turn out to be worth the paper they were written on. It progressed when Obama failed to help them stop Putin in 2014, and now it's metastasized due to Biden's half-assed support and Trump's active antipathy.

clivestaples · a year ago

That's exactly what I'm asking: what tools? The only thing I see is endless supply of money and ammo which means attrition. Russia will win in manpower but maybe not economically. I'm kindly asking to be educated with more than talking points we've all heard from politicians.

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

picafrost · a year ago

The US funded wars in Afghanistan and Iraq for 20 years with no idea what the next move was, no tangible end in sight, and stakes far lower. The so-called threat of weapons of mass destruction was enough to swiftly defeat Iraq's army, topple its government, and start an unprecedented manhunt for its leader.

Russia has invaded a neighboring country twice and spent the first two years of the war they started threatening nuclear weapons. They disregard all negotiated agreements and treaties, poison dissidents in countries the US is allied with, with impunity, engage in asymmetric warfare against Europe and the US, meddle in elections. The Russian government has nothing but contempt for a rules based world order.

Why, suddenly, is the US cowering back when the stakes are much higher and its direct involvement much lower?

clivestaples · a year ago

I don't need a lecture on Russia's character. What I was curious to learn from you, or anyone, what could be done differently to defeat them? How would Russia respond if we send more advanced weaponry? Does Ukraine have the men to fight?

I'm getting downvoted but honestly looking for answers.

clivestaples commented on Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies reuters.com/world/europe/... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross

robwwilliams · a year ago

Help them win it. Like we did in two world wars in the 20th century. Here in the 21st century we get off easy and just provide material support, and intelligence; not blood. Hell of a deal to defend democracy.

clivestaples · a year ago

We've been doing that. What more do you suggest we do?