跳到主要内容
TopBackground2159 u/TopBackground2159 头像

TopBackground2159

u/TopBackground2159

信息流选项
热门
最受欢迎
查看
卡片
紧凑

Je suis d'accord avec le commentaire au dessus. Le laisser tout seul dans une pièce et lui faire subir tes entrées et sorties il va mal le vivre.

Laisse le choisir s'il veut être dans son coin caché ou essayer de venir jouer avec vous, à son rythme.


Il me semble que c'est toi qui a signé un bail mais n'en a pas respecté les termes. Un bail code civil t'interdit de faire du logement ta résidence principale.

Nul ne peut se prévaloir de sa propre turpitude.

Le risque concret me parait simple, fin du bail. La prochaine fois que tu cherches une résidence principale, ne signe pas un bail code civil.


Would be the case if you had not posted your comment. It's been upvoted. Several times.

So back to calls it is. For now.


I disagree, while what gets announced or proposed goes well beyond reason, what gets actually applied always remains within some """"reasonable"""" range. Hence the "TACO" saying.

And there's been a LOT of gains, exactly in the pockets we'd expect to see growing.

Hell, even WSB's finest don't want to jump on options after his tweets, look at the mood here, I see sad people expecting a flat market.


The Greenland situation is "pretty simple".

Greenland is close enough from the US that if the US army really wants to take the island, there's nothing anyone could do about it.

But then, what would be the cost ? Europeans would not be pissed, they would be enraged. That would mean the end of US bases in the EU, and the end of US access to the Mediterranean. The consequence would be the end of the US dominance on the oceans worldwide. That's something the Europeans can enforce, because it's on our doorstep, and one ocean away for the US.

That's too high a price to pay for Greenland, way too high.


EU has mostly two methods.

The usual one, which is to pass a law that happens to allow a EU court to fine a US company for billions. This one, the EU did not wait for Trump to apply it. Good thing is we can even blame "an independent judge" and pretend it's not a political agenda.

The nuclear one which is that without EU bases and Mediterranean access there's no such thing as world's ocean dominance for the US. This one is not even mentioned because faces need to be saved, but it's a hard reality, and the reason the US won't launch a military offensive on Greenland. It's a nice piece of land, it's easy to take, but the price would be too high.


There's no "EU retaliation".

All the EU does is buy time and send different politicians to meet him. At some point they'll send someone he happens to spend a good time with, so he changes his mind. Until the next tantrum.

Talks of EU retaliation are mostly for EU crowds to hear, the strategy is totally to wait for the TACO moment while pretending they take the clown seriously.

It's a pretty efficient strategy in the end, any kindergarten teacher or psy ward nurse will confirm how efficient it is.


From a US point of view, that's true.

But since it's at best a very unreliable ally, alternatives are better, because not being betrayed is better.

Having the nicest toys in the courtyard does not mean you'll get friends to play with you if you're an insufferable bully.