Norbert Hofer (FPÖ) to host US-Russia summit in Vienna if elected President

[Tender Branson]

Today, Norbert Hofer (far-right populist candidate for President in Austria on Dec. 4) said that if elected he will host a US-Russia summit in Vienna "on neutral ground" to normalize the ties between US and Russia and to negotiate with both powers about several international policy issues.

Hofer was also officially invited to Washington on behalf of Trump by Steve King (R-Iowa), in the event he's elected President on Dec. 4

http://derstandard.at/2000047442258/Hofer-will-zwischen-USA-und-Russland-vermitteln

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

There is no comparision with 1970s Detente, which was a right and logic move, an appeasing Putin now.

[Tender Branson]

Portraying himself as an international "statesman" who wants to establish better ties again between the US and Russia could actually help Hofer win the election here.

Until recently, the left-wing candidate Van der Bellen was seen as better on this issue - but in recent months Hofer has been travelling to all kinds of countries and met serveral important and not so important politicians.

Hofer's argument that the Austrian economy and its workers could benefit from better ties between the US and Russia could gain some ground with voters.

But if he poodles up too much with Trump and Putin, it could also piss off many other voters ...

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Hofer has said he will be a much more active President than any other previous Austrian President though ...

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

There is no comparision with 1970s Detente, which was a right and logic move, an appeasing Putin now.

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

But I welcome Russia entrenching itself in it's rightful territory of the Crimea that has been Russian since the Washington Presidency, and I wouldn't mind NATO coming apart for that matter since it is basically the military arm of the soon to be dead post-WWII era.

I also hope we align with the Assad regime, work to weaken transnational superstates in the making like the EU, and prepare for the powerful economic vacuum that the collapse of China (circa 2050) will bring.

[Crumpets]

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

There is no comparision with 1970s Detente, which was a right and logic move, an appeasing Putin now.

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

But I welcome Russia entrenching itself in it's rightful territory of the Crimea that has been Russian since the Washington Presidency, and I wouldn't mind NATO coming apart for that matter since it is basically the military arm of the soon to be dead post-WWII era.

I also hope we align with the Assad regime, work to weaken transnational superstates in the making like the EU, and prepare for the powerful economic vacuum that the collapse of China (circa 2050) will bring.

Do you think Trump knows or cares? Putin could probably name any country he wants US forces to withdraw from and Trump would just say "yeah, why do we have them there anyway?"

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

There is no comparision with 1970s Detente, which was a right and logic move, an appeasing Putin now.

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

But I welcome Russia entrenching itself in it's rightful territory of the Crimea that has been Russian since the Washington Presidency, and I wouldn't mind NATO coming apart for that matter since it is basically the military arm of the soon to be dead post-WWII era.

I also hope we align with the Assad regime, work to weaken transnational superstates in the making like the EU, and prepare for the powerful economic vacuum that the collapse of China (circa 2050) will bring.

Do you think Trump knows or cares? Putin could probably name any country he wants US forces to withdraw from and Trump would just say "yeah, why do we have them there anyway?"

And why do we have them there exactly? What purpose does keeping Putin out of Estonia serve exactly? Besides muh UN obligations?

[Crumpets]

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

There is no comparision with 1970s Detente, which was a right and logic move, an appeasing Putin now.

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

But I welcome Russia entrenching itself in it's rightful territory of the Crimea that has been Russian since the Washington Presidency, and I wouldn't mind NATO coming apart for that matter since it is basically the military arm of the soon to be dead post-WWII era.

I also hope we align with the Assad regime, work to weaken transnational superstates in the making like the EU, and prepare for the powerful economic vacuum that the collapse of China (circa 2050) will bring.

Do you think Trump knows or cares? Putin could probably name any country he wants US forces to withdraw from and Trump would just say "yeah, why do we have them there anyway?"

And why do we have them there exactly? What purpose does keeping Putin out of Estonia serve exactly? Besides muh UN obligations?

Because Estonia is a pluralistic democracy and when Russia previously occupied the Baltic countries, they deported hundreds of thousands of people, killed thousands more, ensured ethnic Russians received preferential treatment to locals, and brutally suppressed any opposition?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

Right, silly me. Mr. Trump likes his undocumented workers.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Crimea had been part of Ukraine since the 50s, when Krustchev ceded it to the Ukrainian SSR. If there was a time to rectify this, it was when the USSR collapsed.

I was long convinced NATO serves no purpose anymore, but what happened in the East convinces me I was wrong.

The whole principle of peace in stability in Europe post-1945 was respect for existing borders.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Weaking the EU is not really in U.S. interest.

Because Estonia is a pluralistic democracy and when Russia previously occupied the Baltic countries, they deported hundreds of thousands of people, killed thousands more, ensured ethnic Russians received preferential treatment to locals, and brutally suppressed any opposition?

Also it's naive to think if you "cede" Estonia to Putin he'd just say "OK, I'm really stopping now with other countries " Well, he can say that, but he proves himself not a trustworthy partner.

[Tender Branson]

Imagine if Hofer really wins and invites both Trump and Putin to Vienna ...

The Austrian leftists (with the help of the usual German professional protester suspects) would probably go nuts and stage the biggest riots we have ever seen and turn the city into a wasteland.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Does he realize President of Austria doesn't have an actual power?

Wonderful. I look forward to renewed detante with Putin.

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

There is no comparision with 1970s Detente, which was a right and logic move, an appeasing Putin now.

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

But I welcome Russia entrenching itself in it's rightful territory of the Crimea that has been Russian since the Washington Presidency, and I wouldn't mind NATO coming apart for that matter since it is basically the military arm of the soon to be dead post-WWII era.

I also hope we align with the Assad regime, work to weaken transnational superstates in the making like the EU, and prepare for the powerful economic vacuum that the collapse of China (circa 2050) will bring.

Do you think Trump knows or cares? Putin could probably name any country he wants US forces to withdraw from and Trump would just say "yeah, why do we have them there anyway?"

And why do we have them there exactly? What purpose does keeping Putin out of Estonia serve exactly? Besides muh UN obligations?

Because Estonia is a pluralistic democracy and when Russia previously occupied the Baltic countries, they deported hundreds of thousands of people, killed thousands more, ensured ethnic Russians received preferential treatment to locals, and brutally suppressed any opposition?

1. Putin is not Stalin. That isn't going to happen.
2. Even if it did, how would that exactly our interest? What purpose would stopping it serve other than to sacrifice the flower of a generation to the war machine and our cities to mushroom clouds?

Throw under the bus? Not Poland, we need Poland. You'll be fine.

Right, silly me. Mr. Trump likes his undocumented workers.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Crimea had been part of Ukraine since the 50s, when Krustchev ceded it to the Ukrainian SSR. If there was a time to rectify this, it was when the USSR collapsed.

I was long convinced NATO serves no purpose anymore, but what happened in the East convinces me I was wrong.

The whole principle of peace in stability in Europe post-1945 was respect for existing borders.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Weaking the EU is not really in U.S. interest.

Because Estonia is a pluralistic democracy and when Russia previously occupied the Baltic countries, they deported hundreds of thousands of people, killed thousands more, ensured ethnic Russians received preferential treatment to locals, and brutally suppressed any opposition?

Also it's naive to think if you "cede" Estonia to Putin he'd just say "OK, I'm really stopping now with other countries " Well, he can say that, but he proves himself not a trustworthy partner.

It isn't naive because I don't care. I'm not dying for some Estonian. And of course, the USSR was not a legitimate successor to the Russian Empire and the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution. So any and all of the precedents set by the USSR are out the window.

[Cassius]

Sanchez is correct of course.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

OK, so we should just ignore every single relevant development that happened during the 73 years the USSR existed? Why so modest? How about we ignore everything that changed since the Congress of Vienna.

Also, let's dispel with the fiction that standing your ground in international relations and honoring existing alliances will automatically led to the nuclear war

Btw, you've been talking about inevitable collapse of Chinese economy. Do you have any idea about the real state of Russian economy?

[Crumpets]

It isn't naive because I don't care. I'm not dying for some Estonian. And of course, the USSR was not a legitimate successor to the Russian Empire and the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution. So any and all of the precedents set by the USSR are out the window.

Just curious, do you have a map somewhere of countries whose citizens you're willing to die for and countries you don't give a sh** about?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It isn't naive because I don't care. I'm not dying for some Estonian. And of course, the USSR was not a legitimate successor to the Russian Empire and the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution. So any and all of the precedents set by the USSR are out the window.

Just curious, do you have a map somewhere of countries whose citizens you're willing to die for and countries you don't give a sh** about?

I just pictured La Fayette, Tadeusz Kościuszko, Comte de Rochambeau, Kazimierz Pułaski and Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben all saying: "f**k this, why would I give a s**t about these colonist?"

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution.

Jesus Christ, Sanchez.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

wow, I never knew there was no force used in the American Revolution!

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution.

Jesus Christ, Sanchez.

I guess 70% of all developments in world's history should be considered illlegitimate and therefore ignorable.

[Famous Mortimer]

The American Revolution was completely unjustified.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The American Revolution was completely unjustified.

A bunch of terrorists who waged the war against their sovereign because they dislikes a tax.

Illegitimate - let's just declare the United States never legally happened

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution.

Jesus Christ, Sanchez.

Only legitimate transfers of power should be recognized. The American Revolution was one. The Glorious Revolution was another. The secession of the CSA can even be legally justified (though, of course, not nearly as much as the subsequent reconquest and repatriation by the Union). These were totally different animals compared to the Russian Revolution or the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany, where existing albeit flawed state structures were overthrown either by force or just general intimidation.

It isn't naive because I don't care. I'm not dying for some Estonian. And of course, the USSR was not a legitimate successor to the Russian Empire and the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution. So any and all of the precedents set by the USSR are out the window.

Just curious, do you have a map somewhere of countries whose citizens you're willing to die for and countries you don't give a sh** about?

I just pictured La Fayette, Tadeusz Kościuszko, Comte de Rochambeau, Kazimierz Pułaski and Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben all saying: "f**k this, why would I give a s**t about these colonist?"

I didn't know Frederick the Great sent Prussian troops to die along with Colonel von Steuben to wage war against their continental ally Britain. That comparison makes total sense!

[politicallefty]

OK, so we should just ignore every single relevant development that happened during the 73 years the USSR existed? Why so modest? How about we ignore everything that changed since the Congress of Vienna.

Also, let's dispel with the fiction that standing your ground in international relations and honoring existing alliances will automatically led to the nuclear war

Btw, you've been talking about inevitable collapse of Chinese economy. Do you have any idea about the real state of Russian economy?

What you are witnessing is the decline of America. I fully expect within my life to not hear the President of the United States referred to as the Leader of the Free World. Based on recent events, I expect that day to come sooner rather than later.

[GMantis]

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

I find it extremely unlikely that he wants any of these. At this point, the best he could get (and probably wants) would be recognition of the annexation of Crimea and re-absorption of the two secessionist republics on his terms.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution.

Jesus Christ, Sanchez.

Only legitimate transfers of power should be recognized. The American Revolution was one. The Glorious Revolution was another. The secession of the CSA can even be legally justified (though, of course, not nearly as much as the subsequent reconquest and repatriation by the Union). These were totally different animals compared to the Russian Revolution or the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany, where existing albeit flawed state structures were overthrown either by force or just general intimidation.

It isn't naive because I don't care. I'm not dying for some Estonian. And of course, the USSR was not a legitimate successor to the Russian Empire and the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution. So any and all of the precedents set by the USSR are out the window.

Just curious, do you have a map somewhere of countries whose citizens you're willing to die for and countries you don't give a sh** about?

I just pictured La Fayette, Tadeusz Kościuszko, Comte de Rochambeau, Kazimierz Pułaski and Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben all saying: "f**k this, why would I give a s**t about these colonist?"

I didn't know Frederick the Great sent Prussian troops to die along with Colonel von Steuben to wage war against their continental ally Britain. That comparison makes total sense!

Comparision of British-Prussian relationship back then with U.S.-Russian now doesn't make much sense either.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I wonder who are you going to throw under the bus? Would that be my folks? The Baltic Republics? Or maybe just the rest of Ukraine.

I find it extremely unlikely that he wants any of these. At this point, the best he could get (and probably wants) would be recognition of the annexation of Crimea and re-absorption of the two secessionist republics on his terms.

Probably, but there are two troubling factors in play:

1. Putin makes mistakes like everyone else.
2. Putin may not be able to stop due due to internal factors.
 
Also, annexation is not the only way of taking over effective control.