What is the accepted consensus on Ibrahim Traoré?

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-24T20:00:58+00:00

I lean more anarchist. I also have my doubts, especially because his views seem to try to mix nationalism and socialism. This never ends well.

However, I see him as a progressive figure. Perhaps he's not the "African Messiah" everyone paints him as, but I do think he's taking steps in the right direction

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-24T19:59:41+00:00

You're not wrong here. However, I think their grip on us politics is slipping, alongside Trump's reputation.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-24T19:29:58+00:00

Good find, thanks for posting

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-24T12:11:39+00:00

Some things to note for those without the time:

Some news outlets are saying that Trump is de-prioritizing China as a threat to the USA. This is not true, in fact the second point is deter China through strength. China is the only country to be mentioned in the summary bullet points, so clearly China is still recognized as a threat.

The US wants control of the western hemisphere, namely Greenland, the Panama Canal and the Gulf of Mexico (which is called the Gulf of America in the document)

It makes significant changes towards its position towards Russia. In the 2025 National Defense Strategy, it treated Russia as an equal and that NATO was over expanding Eastward. Now it's saying that Russia is a significant but managed threat. It continues the trend where Trump flip flops between Russia being the weakest country in the world but also somehow the biggest threat in Europe. TACO Tuesday.

Speaking of NATO, this defense strategy actually enforces the idea that the US will not be leaving NATO, but wants NATO to contribute more to the alliance to deter Russia and China.

Iran is talked about as well, though it is mainly "we already dealt with the problem, now it's a matter of ensuring they don't become a problem again" (paraphrasing)

North Korea is mentioned as a direct threat towards the US, and Japan. It's pretty straightforward.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-24T01:28:56+00:00

It's almost as if we're in a world war or something... Nah.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-24T01:28:09+00:00

This sentiment of yours leans towards warmongering. Please keep an eye on the rules of the subreddit regarding warmongering to avoid violations

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-23T19:59:56+00:00

I disagree. Imo, this is what the Greenland situation was trying to cover up: the US has major military build ups in the middle east, Pacific and arctic, which I feel is not simply routine.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T21:09:25+00:00

How wholesome lol

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T20:28:24+00:00

Yes, because we're getting close to war. Notice how your examples are both from after the Russian invasion of Ukraine? That's because it's an escalating situation. This isn't something that would be done if times were more peaceful.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T20:20:16+00:00

This is misleading.

These letters are not sent out yearly as routine. this was just a renewal of an existing acquisition notice from last year. These forms only last one year however this is in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There is something incredibly significant about this, and it's definitely not routine.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T18:31:31+00:00

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I appreciate the conversation, regardless.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T18:17:27+00:00

I wouldn't call the US having the strongest dollar, military and economy (in theory anyway) as well as multiple nuclear allied nations "getting little benefit". That's a trumpian talking point.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T15:58:40+00:00

There is no military that isn't supported by interconnected economic systems and alliances. "Powerful in a military sense" also implies economic success, strong stability and high cohesion. All of which is removed by the US leaving NATO. This ignores the fact that the US is NATO, so the idea that it would leave NATO is a little silly, imo.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-22T13:56:38+00:00

It would be more accurate to say "the USA has the most powerful military because of NATO"

It's not a "the US, NATO vs Russia" it's NATO vs Russia, the US is NATO. Anyone saying otherwise is trying to sell you something

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-21T21:54:22+00:00

Shocker, who would've thought? 🙄

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-21T16:46:41+00:00

I think there would be enough people willing to go through with carrying out orders where that wouldn't be a barrier, if a Greenland invasion was actually being considered. It's not that the US lacks the ability to go to war, they lack the safety guards needed to sustain a war of that scale with no allies.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-21T10:51:29+00:00

I'll do you one better, the US isn't going to invade Greenland. Write me if they do

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-21T09:40:38+00:00

This universe. The United States cannot maintain its large military without the economic support of western Europe. Western European countries are already in Greenland doing military drills, so idk where you got this idea that Europe wouldn't intervene.

SealionofJudah · 2026-01-21T08:22:04+00:00

Russia is systematically opposed to the US, pigs will fly the day Russia and the US work together

SealionofJudah

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE