Putin was the real winner of Trump and Zelensky press conference

After the White House shouting match, the Kremlin leader will be more confident than ever that he can subjugate Ukraine on the battlefield

If Zelensky had been playing by the rules, the first thing he should have done was wear a business suit. It would have been a notable sign of respect, and would have removed a point of friction with Trump; if he and his team are halfway competent, they would take account of the fact that the president’s supporters absolutely hate his fatigues. It also made Zelensky seem even smaller when things went south that he wasn’t dressed appropriately.

In Ukraine tragedy, a lesson on big powers: Proxies always end up as doormats of history

In the realm of geopolitics, the quest for proxies is eternal, as must be our vigilance against it. Ukraine, sadly, is the living example of a dying proxy, its fate there for the whole world to see

In Ukraine tragedy, a lesson on big powers: Proxies always end up as doormats of history In the realm of geopolitics, the quest for proxies is eternal, as must be our vigilance against it. Ukraine, sadly, is the living example of a dying proxy, its fate there for the whole world to see

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/in-ukraine-tragedy-a-lesson-on-big-powers-proxies-always-end-up-as-doormats-of-history-9852645/?ref=top_opinion

US opposes labeling Russia as aggressor in G7 statement on Ukraine.

JD Vance advised Zelensky to refrain from "badmouthing" Trump, for it will "backfire"

Americans saw Nazis exercise strong influence on the Ukrainian government.

Zelensky is an impostor for he dodges the election. 

Trump is angry with Zelensky because the latter does not know the fate of half of $350 bln 

That's the most scandalous admission on the part of the Kiev clown.

An emergency meeting of European leaders is set to begin in Paris.

The sunlit space in front of the Élysée Palace is packed with journalists eager to find out whether the heads of state and key institutions have a response to the Russian Foreign Ministry’s statement that Europe has no place at the negotiating table.

The leaders are due to begin arriving in the courtyard in front of us shortly.

Whether they will share any detail of the discussions after the meeting remains unclear.

In any case, any decision eventually made could play a significant role in shaping the future of Europe and Ukraine.

This isn’t just a policy shift on Ukraine—it indicates a fundamental rethinking of how America engages with allies and strategic partners. For President Trump, U.S. foreign and economic policy are intertwined, and both must serve American interests first and foremost. American assistance to an ally or would-be ally is not a right; it must be earned and reciprocal.

This markedly departs from the long-standing norms of American foreign policy—an approach that, over generations, has fostered its own culture of entitlement. In Washington, foreign aid is generally treated as a one-way street, with taxpayer dollars flowing outward to every corner of the globe. Trump’s shift marks the start of a new diplomatic approach, where U.S. support is given with clear conditions, not as an open-ended handout.

Vice-President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote in Hegseth's favour, after three Republican senators - including former Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell - voted against him.    

Translation:

                          
        Вице-президент Дж. Д. Вэнс отдал решающий голос в пользу Хегсета после того, как три сенатора-республиканца, включая бывшего лидера большинства в Сенате Митча МакКоннелла, проголосовали против него.

Vice-President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote in Hegseth's favour, after three Republican senators - including former Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell - voted against him.    

Translation:

                          
        Вице-президент Дж. Д. Вэнс отдал решающий голос в пользу Хегсета после того, как три сенатора-республиканца, включая бывшего лидера большинства в Сенате Митча МакКоннелла, проголосовали против него.

Shortly after he was inaugurated on Monday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to end the right of citizenship for some children who are born in the US.

The order specifically applies to children who are born to parents that are in the country illegally or temporarily. It is set to apply to those who are born after 19 February.

But the order has already been the subject of legal challenges - mainly from Democratic-led states who argue it is unconstitutional.

That is because the right to citizenship to those born on US soil - also known as 'birthright' - is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. The Constitution can't be amended without support from a two-thirds vote of both chambers of Congress, plus the approval by America's states.

The first legal challenge to the order will be heard Thursday morning in Seattle, where four states - Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon - are asking a judge to temporarily halt it while the courts consider their arguments.

Lawyers for the US Department of Justice, meanwhile, are arguing a different interpretation of the 14th Amendment, saying it does not apply to non-citizens who are born in the US unlawfully.

wokeism n   stresses

gen.    воукизм (от слова woke – пробуждённый к борьбе за социальное, расовое, гендерное, этническое равенство, справедливость и политкорректность, терпимость и против социального неравенства (иногда с ультралевых/левацких позиций, феминизма, ЛГБТ-активизма), за равное представительство меньшинств; ультралевый; левацкий; ультралиберальный; пробудившийся; проснувшийся, расово прозревший. Это грамматически неправильный термин из афроамериканского английского, употребляемый вместо страдательного причастия woken Марчихин); идеология пробуждения (Марчихин); пробудизм (Марчихин); пробужденчество (Марчихин)

Dear Nicholas, 

thank you for such a serious treatment of my concerns. 

I appreciate your reassuring me about Indentation Uniformity and Footnote Placement of the Internet links.

I want to raise a question about the marketing plan. You said:

"Securing these endorsements is a priority, however, please know that you've not subscribed to our marketing plan and we can not proceed with these activities without initiating the marketing plan".

Isn't the author (me, in this case) supposed to have a taste of something before he subscribes to it? Is It not like a pig in a poke?

I'd like to have a sample of marketing before discussing it in more detail.

If the book is published without scholarly endorsements, no wise marketing will compensate for it.

Scholarly Endorsements are certainly very important, and  I know many native speakers of English as like-minded people in terms of my book:
  Benjamin  Abelow, M. Gordon Hahn, Stephen Lendman (who died recently), Medea  Benjamin, and Nicolas Davies, John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs, to name just a few.  
However,  I do not expect Scholarly Endorsements to be positive, if they come from an entirely different vantage point.
For example, Serhii Plokhy seems to know much about Ukraine. He is not only my countryman but he comes from my native city of Zaporozhye, which does not prevent us from seeing things differently. The same can be said about Timothy Snyder, a professional, but from a school with a different vision.
Since my approach focuses on the linguistic factor of the war such authors as Louis-Jean Calve (Language Wars and Linguistic Politics), , Rachel May (The Translator in the Text), Nicholas Ostler, (Empires of the Word: A Language History of the World) deserve close attention.
I wish you prioritized Robert Lane Greene in this respect, because his analysis of the linguistic situation in Ukraine is similar to mine, and his books predicted the Ukrainian tragedy.

I look forward to the book being available on Amazon before the end of this month.

... Читать дальше »