West Ham Online

Posted: **09 Dec 2024, 09:19**

There. Resident WHO political commentators and gurus can knock yourselves out in here and conduct your endless bickering. All other threads will be locked.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 21:52**

ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 20:37

Those are weasel words, as well you probably already know, they can be interpreted in any way they see fit, eg we meant the safety and prosperity of the geographical location, which by the way requires us to occupy it, there's nothing in there that ensures Ukraine's remaining territory as a sovereign nation

I guess that's my point and this is where "Trump is all bad" fails you.

What is your solution? Boots on the ground?

What words will satisfy you?

And if Trump can't be trusted, why should he abide by any of those words?
Already a number of countries are not meeting their obligations to the NATO treaties, for instance.

Making things real in terms of minerals in US hands, money in it's coffer and a real political win - tough guy image - "people don't start wars when I'm in charge" is better security than words in a treaty, especially if you can't trust Trump in anything. Who is going to punish him if he reneges on any deal? What stops him from breaking a mineral deal? It takes boots on the ground and a massive political loss to take them by force.

And again I guess, if this deal is not good enough in Zelensky's eyes, why did he come to the White House press conference? He has plenty of chance to negotiate before Friday.

again, Zelensky went in the slim chance that US will ensure their protection in return for their £500 billion windfall, to his shock, and the wider world, are now realising now that Trump had no such intentions, I'm amazed someone with "political experience" such as yourself continues to misunderstand this.

I find it sickening Trump said to Zelensky you're risking world War 3, Trump is the one that's pushed that closer to reality by removing a deterrent that's kept that in check for decades. Lithuania and Bolivia are next, mark my words, Putin has been given the green light US won't get involved, and Europe isn't ready or equipped, What a way to thank your allies that followed into two wars in Iraq/Afghanistan.. Bunch of quisling fifth column schills some of you, and you worst of all IOC as you have half a brain, shame.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 21:46**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 21:20
Your interpretation is no more fact based than anyone else so stop pretending. We all saw what happened and both sides have blame attached but if there were to be further talks around security why did Trump tell Zelensky live on air that they were Europes problem.

You and Trump both seem to initially say there were no security guarantees so why come to sign knowing that, but then say that was to be further discussed over lunch so clearly there was potential for a negotiated security agreement - which is it? My guess is you dont know just like the rest of us. I agree though Zelensky should have kept his powder dry for the off air meeting and so should Trump.

It's not my interpretation. It is from multiple sources that were supposed to be at the lunch.

Again, the deal is a security guarantee, just not what Zelensky wanted, apparently. A demonstration that there is "no daylight" between the American and Ukrainian people.

This lazy, "who knows?" is a cop out.

We know:

If he thought the deal could be salvaged, tweaked, clarified, whatever we call it, he knew that was what the lunch was for. He did not wait for that.

If he didn't want a deal, it was deceptive in coming. His right to use any means, but that lead to...

If he wanted to relitigate in the press - he tried. He again has that right but if he wanted the deal, he lost that negotiation.

But the narrative of the ambush is looney tunes, frankly.

What is your solution? For Zelensky on the night and for the Ukraine in general. I am arguing for the deal - basically. What is your alternative?

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 21:35**

happygilmore wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 21:02 Well done Starmer. Stepping up !

You’ll be stepping up soon too!

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 21:20**

ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 20:54
BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 20:43
Perhaps the meltdown that ensued during the live discussion could have been avoided if Trump had simply suggested that as per the agreement further discussion would be ongoing. He didnt have to agree to specifics and that would have shut Zelensky down and kept the talks going. The question is why didnt he do that? Had he already told Zelensky that there would be no such guarantees, which may have put the whole conversation on edge before it even started? Who knows but frankly you know about as much as the rest of us!

Apparently I do know more because I have read and watched too much.

They were expecting to "further discuss" in the lunch that followed the press conference. But Zelensky started to try to relitigate it in front of the press. So there was no lunch.

I guess again the original question, why does Zelensky come if he didn't want the deal?

Your interpretation is no more fact based than anyone else so stop pretending. We all saw what happened and both sides have blame attached but if there were to be further talks around security why did Trump tell Zelensky live on air that they were Europes problem.

You and Trump both seem to initially say there were no security guarantees so why come to sign knowing that, but then say that was to be further discussed over lunch so clearly there was potential for a negotiated security agreement - which is it? My guess is you dont know just like the rest of us. I agree though Zelensky should have kept his powder dry for the off air meeting and so should Trump.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 21:06**

And King Charles

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 21:02**

Well done Starmer. Stepping up !

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 20:54**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 20:43
Perhaps the meltdown that ensued during the live discussion could have been avoided if Trump had simply suggested that as per the agreement further discussion would be ongoing. He didnt have to agree to specifics and that would have shut Zelensky down and kept the talks going. The question is why didnt he do that? Had he already told Zelensky that there would be no such guarantees, which may have put the whole conversation on edge before it even started? Who knows but frankly you know about as much as the rest of us!

Apparently I do know more because I have read and watched too much.

They were expecting to "further discuss" in the lunch that followed the press conference. But Zelensky started to try to relitigate it in front of the press. So there was no lunch.

I guess again the original question, why does Zelensky come if he didn't want the deal?

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 20:43**

ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:56
BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21

This is why it requires full transparency and a proper negotiation including all parties. Zelensky obviously wants guarantees and hasnt had them hence asking for them. how they may be delivered is obviously one of the points he wants clarified before he agrees to any kind of land grab by Putin.

Pretty transparent in fact.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/f ... 025-02-26/

The details needed to be worked out. Not on live TV.

Of course, Zelensky wants more, its his job to try for more. Even Joe Biden yelled at him for continual asking for more. Even Starmer with all his support words and pounds, won't give him all the security he wants.

Edit: I guess getting back to the original point of this, if Zelensky didn't think the deal was good enough, why insist on coming to the White House for what amounted to a signing ceremony. He had weeks to negotiate the deal (and opportunities to sign.)

Section 10 suggests further work on Security guarantees but theres nothing concrete in there. So not such a stupid argument if the agreement supports further efforts to achieve it.

And its not beyond the realms of imagination that Zelensky having read the agreement assumed there would be further talks when his visited the White House.

10. This Bilateral Agreement and the Fund Agreement will constitute integral elements of the architecture of bilateral and multilateral agreements, as well as concrete steps to establish lasting peace, and to strengthen economic security resilience and reflect the objectives set forth in the preamble to this Bilateral Agreement.

The Government of the United States of America supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace. Participants will seek to identify any necessary steps to protect mutual investments, as defined in the Fund Agreement.

Perhaps the meltdown that ensued during the live discussion could have been avoided if Trump had simply suggested that as per the agreement further discussion would be ongoing. He didnt have to agree to specifics and that would have shut Zelensky down and kept the talks going. The question is why didnt he do that? Had he already told Zelensky that there would be no such guarantees, which may have put the whole conversation on edge before it even started? Who knows but frankly you know about as much as the rest of us!

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 20:37**

Those are weasel words, as well you probably already know, they can be interpreted in any way they see fit, eg we meant the safety and prosperity of the geographical location, which by the way requires us to occupy it, there's nothing in there that ensures Ukraine's remaining territory as a sovereign nation

I guess that's my point and this is where "Trump is all bad" fails you.

What is your solution? Boots on the ground?

What words will satisfy you?

And if Trump can't be trusted, why should he abide by any of those words?
Already a number of countries are not meeting their obligations to the NATO treaties, for instance.

Making things real in terms of minerals in US hands, money in it's coffer and a real political win - tough guy image - "people don't start wars when I'm in charge" is better security than words in a treaty, especially if you can't trust Trump in anything. Who is going to punish him if he reneges on any deal? What stops him from breaking a mineral deal? It takes boots on the ground and a massive political loss to take them by force.

And again I guess, if this deal is not good enough in Zelensky's eyes, why did he come to the White House press conference? He has plenty of chance to negotiate before Friday.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:50**

IF you want to see how the markets reacted you can Google.

10 yr T bill, CNBC.com has a report on it.

why does that matter, because the Bond traders are the sharpest out there, the bond market is always one to watch. The 10 yr is the proxy for the long term fixed mortgage rates in the USA as it is loosely pegged to the ABS market (Asset Backed Securities)

You will see the average 30 yr fixed rate loan offered dropped too.

bankrate.com will give you that data.

Hope that helps!

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:48**

ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 19:30
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 19:14
he's avoided answering that pertinent point, he seems to think Zelensky should accept it on the good faith on the word of... check's notes... Putin and Trump

There are words about security in the deal. " safety, security and prosperity of Ukraine etc."
All treaties are words on paper. If a NATO country decides,- we are not enforcing Article 5 - there is no force that punishes them. Maybe some political will at home.

In the real world, it is material actions that will provide security. Getting your money and the political capital dug into the Ukraine and counting on them for rare earth minerals. That is as real as security can get.

"There are words about security in the deal. " safety, security and prosperity of Ukraine etc."

Those are weasel words, as well you probably already know, they can be interpreted in any way they see fit, eg we meant the safety and prosperity of the geographical location, which by the way requires us to occupy it, there's nothing in there that ensures Ukraine's remaining territory as a sovereign nation

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:35**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:42
Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 17:52 Yeah and there are plenty who are saying we are heading for more inflation and also some who say we are heading for deflation,(recession) that’s what makes a market ffs!

IT’S ALWAYS THAT WAY.

All you have is conjecture but your track record makes everyone question why you still think you have an opinion?

It was you that was stating factually that Trump was successfully bringing inflation down and that interest rates would follow. Ive not seen those figures so dont have a hissy fit just tell me how or where that is stated. If you cant then yours is just conjecture too!

I know how markets work!

Im trying to understand why you and Canada and others have such faith in Trump. It seems bizarre because of what we hear about him currently and his past. The way he conducts himself even you must admit is weirdly non-statemanlike and his relationship with Musk is oddest of all. The news is is nearly always portraying whats going on there as a curcus/shit show and no matter what you may think we in the UK are not restricted to what we can read and as google is backing Trump youd think search algorithms articles would even or maybe favouring Trump but they dont.

Im not saying what I see is perfect hence asking what articles show you that Trumps economic policies are working. A successful US helps the UK markets, helps inflation, interest rates and my pension pot. So if things are looking up Im all for it!

Stop thinking Im trying to trip you up - Im not! But if you bring up Moyes thats different!!!! Swt!

Alright Billy, I’ll oblige you, fuck knows why.

The markets don’t look at the headline print, they look at what’s in the data. They all talk about CPI numbers the number that matters is the PCE Deflator. It’s what the Fed prefers.

It came in line with expectations which now signals that the Fed are now more inclined to drop rates again this year because the data shows inflation is softening.

There is also the 5yr, 5yr forward inflation rate which is issued by the st Louis Fed, a leading indicator preferred by a lot of traders that shows the expected trend of inflation for the next 5 years, looks real promising.
The 5 yr forward website is:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T5YIFR, you should see todays chart when you open. And yes, the trend is your friend!

Now as for the PCE deflator and what it means you can find articles from manbc, cbs it’s all over.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2025/02/28/pce ... 2025-.html

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:30**

Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 19:14
he's avoided answering that pertinent point, he seems to think Zelensky should accept it on the good faith on the word of... check's notes... Putin and Trump

There are words about security in the deal. " safety, security and prosperity of Ukraine etc."
All treaties are words on paper. If a NATO country decides,- we are not enforcing Article 5 - there is no force that punishes them. Maybe some political will at home.

In the real world, it is material actions that will provide security. Getting your money and the political capital dug into the Ukraine and counting on them for rare earth minerals. That is as real as security can get.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:21**

Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 19:09
Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:54
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:37
I bet you believe the moon landings were fake and the Earth is flat. Silly moose.

I’ll tell you what I didn’t fall for, I didn’t fall for the Russian collusion hoax or the Russian disinformation theory offered by the Dems for Hunters laptop top.

hmm no direct answer then, interesting, do you believe in pixies as well son?

Question doesn’t warrant an answer.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:14**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:51
ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:35
BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21 BillyJenningsBoots

Yes you are right. No guarentee of security. Please.

The US needs the actual minerals, not just money from them. Specifically a safe, reliable supply. It wants to be less reliant on China in that area.

Trump has made a huge deal of getting minerals for the America people. Trumpetting it all over the place, pun intended. He has made it a big deal politically.

Then practical concerns about the need of the minerals aside and any American lives and dollars that might be imbedded, he going to abandon all those interests and political capital if Russia invades again?

You are living in an anti-Trump fantasy if you think that is realistic.

Great deal for the US but why should anyone beleive what Trump says. What Ukraine need is security and all we hear is Trump telling us joining NATO aint happening but they need something in writing as part of the deal. Why is it so difficult to appreciate that?

Thats all I understand Zelensky is asking for and who can blame him or the Ukranian people for wanting/needing that?

he's avoided answering that pertinent point, he seems to think Zelensky should accept it on the good faith on the word of... check's notes... Putin and Trump

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:09**

Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:54
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:37
Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:30
Diatribe backed by facts. Facts provided under oath!

You got some CIA Harvey Oswald type trying to assasinate a U S President and you think the CIA didn’t know? And the Secret Service just happened to turn into the keystone cops that day?

I bet you believe Epstein hung himself too!

I bet you believe the moon landings were fake and the Earth is flat. Silly moose.

I’ll tell you what I didn’t fall for, I didn’t fall for the Russian collusion hoax or the Russian disinformation theory offered by the Dems for Hunters laptop top.

hmm no direct answer then, interesting, do you believe in pixies as well son?

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:58**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:51
ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:35
BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21 BillyJenningsBoots

Yes you are right. No guarentee of security. Please.

The US needs the actual minerals, not just money from them. Specifically a safe, reliable supply. It wants to be less reliant on China in that area.

Trump has made a huge deal of getting minerals for the America people. Trumpetting it all over the place, pun intended. He has made it a big deal politically.

Then practical concerns about the need of the minerals aside and any American lives and dollars that might be imbedded, he going to abandon all those interests and political capital if Russia invades again?

You are living in an anti-Trump fantasy if you think that is realistic.

Great deal for the US but why should anyone beleive what Trump says. What Ukraine need is security and all we hear is Trump telling us joining NATO aint happening but they need something in writing as part of the deal. Why is it so difficult to appreciate that?

Thats all I understand Zelensky is asking for and who can blame him or the Ukranian people for wanting/needing that?

Well you either believe Trump or Putin you decide. Not smart to second guess and question the hand that feeds you. Especially in front of the press. Looks like it’s Europes war now anyway. Good luck with that!

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:56**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21

This is why it requires full transparency and a proper negotiation including all parties. Zelensky obviously wants guarantees and hasnt had them hence asking for them. how they may be delivered is obviously one of the points he wants clarified before he agrees to any kind of land grab by Putin.

Pretty transparent in fact.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/f ... 025-02-26/

The details needed to be worked out. Not on live TV.

Of course, Zelensky wants more, its his job to try for more. Even Joe Biden yelled at him for continual asking for more. Even Starmer with all his support words and pounds, won't give him all the security he wants.

Edit: I guess getting back to the original point of this, if Zelensky didn't think the deal was good enough, why insist on coming to the White House for what amounted to a signing ceremony. He had weeks to negotiate the deal (and opportunities to sign.)

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:54**

Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:37
Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:30
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21

hilarious frothy mouthed diatribe as usual Nutsin, but i'm sure what he was referring to was you stating as fact the democratic party were behind two hits on your idol, one of the shooters being a bona fide republican card holding member sort of scuppers your argument doesn't it

Diatribe backed by facts. Facts provided under oath!

You got some CIA Harvey Oswald type trying to assasinate a U S President and you think the CIA didn’t know? And the Secret Service just happened to turn into the keystone cops that day?

I bet you believe Epstein hung himself too!

I bet you believe the moon landings were fake and the Earth is flat. Silly moose.

I’ll tell you what I didn’t fall for, I didn’t fall for the Russian collusion hoax or the Russian disinformation theory offered by the Dems for Hunters laptop top.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:51**

ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:35
BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21 BillyJenningsBoots

Yes you are right. No guarentee of security. Please.

The US needs the actual minerals, not just money from them. Specifically a safe, reliable supply. It wants to be less reliant on China in that area.

Trump has made a huge deal of getting minerals for the America people. Trumpetting it all over the place, pun intended. He has made it a big deal politically.

Then practical concerns about the need of the minerals aside and any American lives and dollars that might be imbedded, he going to abandon all those interests and political capital if Russia invades again?

You are living in an anti-Trump fantasy if you think that is realistic.

Great deal for the US but why should anyone beleive what Trump says. What Ukraine need is security and all we hear is Trump telling us joining NATO aint happening but they need something in writing as part of the deal. Why is it so difficult to appreciate that?

Thats all I understand Zelensky is asking for and who can blame him or the Ukranian people for wanting/needing that?

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:42**

Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 17:52 Yeah and there are plenty who are saying we are heading for more inflation and also some who say we are heading for deflation,(recession) that’s what makes a market ffs!

IT’S ALWAYS THAT WAY.

All you have is conjecture but your track record makes everyone question why you still think you have an opinion?

It was you that was stating factually that Trump was successfully bringing inflation down and that interest rates would follow. Ive not seen those figures so dont have a hissy fit just tell me how or where that is stated. If you cant then yours is just conjecture too!

I know how markets work!

Im trying to understand why you and Canada and others have such faith in Trump. It seems bizarre because of what we hear about him currently and his past. The way he conducts himself even you must admit is weirdly non-statemanlike and his relationship with Musk is oddest of all. The news is is nearly always portraying whats going on there as a curcus/shit show and no matter what you may think we in the UK are not restricted to what we can read and as google is backing Trump youd think search algorithms articles would even or maybe favouring Trump but they dont.

Im not saying what I see is perfect hence asking what articles show you that Trumps economic policies are working. A successful US helps the UK markets, helps inflation, interest rates and my pension pot. So if things are looking up Im all for it!

Stop thinking Im trying to trip you up - Im not! But if you bring up Moyes thats different!!!! Swt!

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:37**

Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:30
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21
Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 16:04 https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-cl ... 1653084709

In your defense Anon, you probably don’t get to hear the truth considering the press in the UK is gutter press and only want to stick to their narrative.

Funny how you think you are so informed though.
weird really how you can be so adamant and yet so ignorant at the same time.

What is obvious is you have no clue what you are talking about.

But you keep drinking the ko aid these left wing propagandist rags are feeding you while your country is ruined and your voice is crushed by your Gov’t.

Look at the people you have decided to follow and believe and then ask yourself are you really in any position to criticize anyone?

hilarious frothy mouthed diatribe as usual Nutsin, but i'm sure what he was referring to was you stating as fact the democratic party were behind two hits on your idol, one of the shooters being a bona fide republican card holding member sort of scuppers your argument doesn't it

Diatribe backed by facts. Facts provided under oath!

You got some CIA Harvey Oswald type trying to assasinate a U S President and you think the CIA didn’t know? And the Secret Service just happened to turn into the keystone cops that day?

I bet you believe Epstein hung himself too!

I bet you believe the moon landings were fake and the Earth is flat. Silly moose.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:35**

BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21 BillyJenningsBoots

Yes you are right. No guarentee of security. Please.

The US needs the actual minerals, not just money from them. Specifically a safe, reliable supply. It wants to be less reliant on China in that area.

Trump has made a huge deal of getting minerals for the America people. Trumpetting it all over the place, pun intended. He has made it a big deal politically.

Then practical concerns about the need of the minerals aside and any American lives and dollars that might be imbedded, he going to abandon all those interests and political capital if Russia invades again?

You are living in an anti-Trump fantasy if you think that is realistic.

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:32**

Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:30
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 18:21
Nutsin wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 16:04 https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-cl ... 1653084709

In your defense Anon, you probably don’t get to hear the truth considering the press in the UK is gutter press and only want to stick to their narrative.

Funny how you think you are so informed though.
weird really how you can be so adamant and yet so ignorant at the same time.

What is obvious is you have no clue what you are talking about.

But you keep drinking the ko aid these left wing propagandist rags are feeding you while your country is ruined and your voice is crushed by your Gov’t.

Look at the people you have decided to follow and believe and then ask yourself are you really in any position to criticize anyone?

hilarious frothy mouthed diatribe as usual Nutsin, but i'm sure what he was referring to was you stating as fact the democratic party were behind two hits on your idol, one of the shooters being a bona fide republican card holding member sort of scuppers your argument doesn't it

Diatribe backed by facts. Facts provided under oath!

You got some CIA Harvey Oswald type trying to assasinate a U S President and you think the CIA didn’t know? And the Secret Service just happened to turn into the keystone cops that day?

I bet you believe Epstein hung himself too!

Difference with me and Pickle is I’m right!

And I really don’t give a fuck about your opinion of me!

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 18:32**

ironsofcanada wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 17:30
BillyJenningsBoots wrote: ↑02 Mar 2025, 17:20
. But to expect no security guarantees and to be excluded from NATO leaves Ukraine in a lose lose situation.

This is the most ignorant argument that has been floated up on here, repeatedly. It is taking Zelensky side and swallowing it whole.

America would be putting companies, people and money physically into the Ukraine. Money from minerals does not magically show up in the US. If Russia attacks again with that in place, the US is not going protect it's obviously signicant interests? Or more realistically Russia is not going attack because it doesn't want to piss the US off.

That is a security guarentee. Zelensky wants more, ie more money at least. We can argue that but to say there are no guarentees in the realpolotik of this is crazy.

And yeah, it is frusterating that thinking people lap this up.

your massive assumption is Putin and Trump haven't already agreed some sort of deal, Trump gets them to stop fighting and takes a cut, Putin gets to take what he's already gained and perhaps a little bit more

West Ham Online

The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)

Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)