A reminder that as the US continues to threaten countries around the world, fedposting is to be very much avoided (even with qualifiers like “in Minecraft”) and comments containing it will be removed.

Image is of a harbor in Tasiilak, Greenland.


NATO infighting? You love to see it, folks.

The latest incident of America’s satrapies becoming increasingly unhappy about their mandated kowtowing involves, of all places, Greenland. As I’m sure most people here are aware, Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark with a degree of geopolitical and economic importance - the former due to its proximity to Russia, and the latter due to the proven and potential reserves of minerals that could be mined there. It’s also been an odd fascination of Trump during his reign, now culminating in outright demands.

Trump has called for negotiations with Denmark to purchase Greenland, justifying this by stating that it would be safer from Russia and China under America’s protection. Apparently, Norway’s decision to not give him the Nobel Peace Prize further inflamed him (not that the Norweigan government decides who receives the prizes). He has also said that countries that do not allow him to make the decision - which not only includes Denmark, but also other European countries - will suffer increased tariffs by June, and that he has not ruled out a military solution.

This threat has led to much internal bickering inside the West, with European leaders stating they will not give in to Trump’s demands, and even sending small numbers of troops to Greenland. The most bizarre part of this whole affair is that the US already basically has total military access and control over Greenland anyway, and has since the 1950s, when they signed an agreement with Denmark. There are already several US military facilities on Greenland, and B-52 bombers have famously flown in the vicinity of the island (and crashed into it with nuclear bombs in tow, in fact). Therefore, this whole event - in line with his all-performance, little-results presidency so far - seems to be largely about the theatrics of forcing the Europeans to continue to submit to his whims. I would not be surprised if they ultimately do sign a very imbalanced deal, though - the current European leadership is bound too tightly to the US to put up even half-hearted resistance.

This is all simultaneously occurring alongside the Canadian Prime Minister’s visit to China in which longstanding sore spots in their bilateral relationship are being addressed, with China reducing tariffs on Canadian canola oilseeds, and Canada reducing tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, as well as currency swaps between their central banks, among many other things. It seems no accident that Canada’s reconsideration of their relationship with China is occurring as Trump has made remarks about turning Canada into the next US state, as well as the demand for the renegotiation of the USMCA.


Last week’s thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine

If you have evidence of Zionist crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

Mirrors of Telegram channels that have been erased by Zionist censorship.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


  • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    22 days ago

    Why has Donald Trump withdrawn the US from the World Health Organization? - Sky News

    Article

    Experts have warned the US withdrawal could seriously weaken the world’s defences against diseases, as it would put a massive dent in the WHO’s resources.

    A year ago, Donald Trump signed an order to remove the US from the World Health Organization (WHO).

    The US president singled the WHO executive order out as a “big one” as he signed it alongside 100+ others upon his return to the White House.

    The US has now seen out a mandatory one-year notice period, meaning it has officially withdrawn from the WHO.

    What was Mr Trump’s rationale for leaving and what impact could it have?

    What reasons has Trump given for wanting to leave the WHO?

    Mr Trump, who also tried to leave the WHO in his first term, has suggested cost-cutting is the main reason for ending its membership.

    “World Health ripped us off, everybody rips off the United States. It’s not going to happen anymore,” Trump said at the signing last year.

    WHO is funded through both obligatory and voluntary contributions from governments and other donors in its 193 member states. The obligatory contributions are calculated according to a country’s wealth and population, and fluctuate annually.

    The US government’s grievances over payments took up a significant portion of the executive order, with the opening section claiming “WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries’ assessed payments”.

    It continued: “China, with a population of 1.4 billion, has 300 percent of the population of the United States, yet contributes nearly 90 percent less to the WHO.”

    But before the mention of money, there came a hefty criticism of the WHO’s handling of the COVID pandemic and other global health crises, with the executive order claiming it failed to “adopt urgently needed reforms” and showed an “inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states”.

    As well as the WHO, the Trump administration announced on 7 January plans to withdraw from 35 international and 31 United Nations (UN) entities.

    Explaining the decision, a White House memo stated Mr Trump had “prioritised American interests by redirecting focus and resources toward domestic priorities such as infrastructure, military readiness, and border security, and acting swiftly to protect American companies from foreign interference”.

    It was previously reported that the US had to meet its financial obligations to the WHO for the 2024-25 fiscal year before leaving.

    NPR has reported that the US owed $228m (£169m), but that it hadn’t paid as of 20 January. Sky News has contacted the Trump administration for comment.

    What impact could the withdrawal have?

    Experts have warned it could weaken the world’s defences against dangerous new outbreaks capable of triggering pandemics, because the US has historically been among its biggest donors and has provided it with hundreds of staffers with specialised public health expertise.

    The US has given the WHO about $160m to $815m every year for the past decade, contributing to its yearly budget of about $2bn to $3bn.

    Because of this, experts say losing the country’s support could cripple numerous global health initiatives, including the effort to eradicate polio, maternal and child health programmes, and research to identify new viral threats.

    Dr Tom Frieden, president and CEO of the US advocacy group Resolve to Save Lives, explained in a statement: "Withdrawing from WHO not only cuts crucial funding from the agency, but it also surrenders our role as a global health leader and silences America’s voice in critical decisions affecting global health security.

    “Real reform requires engagement, not abandonment. We cannot make WHO more effective by walking away from it. This decision weakens America’s influence and increases the risk of a deadly pandemic.”

    Lawrence Gostin, director of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Global Health Law at Georgetown University, warned the WHO losing American resources would devastate its global surveillance and epidemic response efforts.

    “It would make it more likely that we could see novel diseases spinning out of control, crossing borders, and potentially sparking a pandemic,” he said.

    How has the WHO responded?

    In a statement released after Mr Trump signed the order, the WHO said: "WHO plays a crucial role in protecting the health and security of the world’s people, including Americans, by addressing the root causes of disease, building stronger health systems, and detecting, preventing and responding to health emergencies, including disease outbreaks, often in dangerous places where others cannot go.

    "The United States was a founding member of WHO in 1948 and has participated in shaping and governing WHO’s work ever since, alongside 193 other Member States, including through its active participation in the World Health Assembly and Executive Board.

    "For over seven decades, WHO and the USA have saved countless lives and protected Americans and all people from health threats. Together, we ended smallpox, and together we have brought polio to the brink of eradication. American institutions have contributed to and benefited from membership of WHO.

    "With the participation of the United States and other Member States, WHO has over the past seven years implemented the largest set of reforms in its history, to transform our accountability, cost-effectiveness, and impact in countries. This work continues.

    “We hope the United States will reconsider and we look forward to engaging in constructive dialogue to maintain the partnership between the USA and WHO, for the benefit of the health and wellbeing of millions of people around the globe.”

    Sky News contacted the WHO for comment ahead of the US’ official departure.