Begin the Beguine with the Bromancer, but stand by for some Killer Returns ...

 

RFK Jr in charge, and the measles are back and what could go wrong, but the story the pond most liked was picked up in Rolling Stone by Mike Klee, Art of the Deal, The Trump Administration Might Just Spend $400 Million on ‘Armored’ Teslas...

There's more at the link, but that'll do pig, that'll do ...

Naturally the likes of Rachel Maddow had a field day recycling that famous clip featuring a stone thrower taking out the "armoured" glass while Uncle Leon looked on...

What a clunker, and what a clue to the current state of the disunited states ... but the pond can't indulge itself all day, so much comedy and so much tragedy, and speaking of shattered glass, the reptiles quickly moved these off the extreme far right commentary section ...

Luckily the pond had preserved the memories ...

Oh the poor bro, he FAFO'd big time, and as for the pond, it can't believe it wasted all that time presenting Russia as some kind of dastardly spectre always ready to do down the free world. Might have been better off watching RT and learning how to submit to Vlad the sociopath.

The bromancer was disconsolate in Sweet nothings and long talks: Donald Trump takes very different tactic with Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump seems to be giving away so much to Vladimir Putin so early. It’s very unclear that this is the best way to optimise Ukraine’s position or Western strategic interests.

Very unclear? Why in the caption that followed, the lizard Oz did a huge dump, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. It’s realistic of Trump to recognise that Ukraine won’t reclaim all the territory it controlled before 2014.

That set the tone as the bromancer clung on to hope against hope's feeble odds ...

In the matter of Ukraine, and the Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump has somewhat confusingly reversed his normal pattern of extremely robust negotiation.
Routinely, he opens with an extreme position and a great deal of threatening bluster. With Putin, by contrast, it’s so far all cooing and billing, whispering sweet nothings in adolescent length telephone conversations.
Trump may yet produce a decent deal out of all this. He’s certainly astonishingly energetic in what are still the very early days of his second presidency. All reform, all good government, needs energy in the executive, so the saying goes. Trump exhibits loads of energy in the executive.
But in this instance he seems to be giving away so much to Putin so early. It’s very unclear that this is the best way to optimise Ukraine’s position or Western strategic interests.

Loads of energy? That's the best he's got? Why Hannibal Lecter had loads of energy when energy was needed, and so the reptiles featured two sociopaths in AV action, US President Donald Trump said that negotiations to bring an end to the war in Ukraine will commence "immediately" following a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The most interesting question in all this is what Vlad has over King Donald I. He's such a quisling and a patsy, such a stooge and a lickspittle, and yet see how easy it is for the bromancer himself to fold ... 

Imagine him back in the day scribbling furiously ...

It’s realistic of Neville Chamberlain to recognise, as the Munich agreement acknowledged, that Czechoslovakia won’t reclaim all the territory it controlled before 1938. Some critics may feel acknowledging this so publicly is to give Putin a needless early victory.

Peace in our time, a piece of this and a piece of that, and yet here we are ...

It’s realistic of Trump to recognise, as his Defence Secretary, Pete Hegseth says, that Ukraine won’t reclaim all the territory it controlled before 2014. Some critics may feel acknowledging this so publicly is to give Putin a needless early victory. But actually the sheer obviousness of this reality, and the widespread, sustained, diplomatic discussion of a ceasefire in place, and even a permanent settlement along these lines, has been going on for so long that it’s not too much of a big deal for Trump to publicly acknowledge that.
But there’s quite a bit else in the various Trump administration statements that seem overly generous to Putin. For a start, there’s the immediate declaration that Ukraine cannot join NATO.
This is very pleasing to Putin. It was certainly realistic to think that Putin needed a face saving road to peace after his catastrophic and murderous war; therefore NATO membership for Ukraine might always have been unrealistic.

For a start? King Donald I hates NATO, wants to leave NATO, and here's the bromancer ready to give away that piece of the farm ... all in the name of "realism."

Cue another snap of the two narcissistic sociopaths, Trump and Putin in 2018. Picture: AFP

But try as he might the bro still has saucy doubts and fears ....

But to concede this publicly, pre-emptively and for absolutely nothing in return, turns Trump’s art of the deal upside down.
As Hegseth himself has pointed out, any durable peace must involve credible security guarantees for Ukraine. Otherwise Russia can take a breather, digest the territory it’s acquired, and come back to finish the job in a few years time.
Yet the US has also declared it won’t be part of any peace-monitoring NATO force NATO might deploy in Ukraine. That is consistent with Trump’s long standing opposition to American troops becoming entangled in endless conflicts around the world. But again, why give that gift to Putin in advance? And for nothing in return?
Worst of all, perhaps, the Americans also made it clear that the troops of any European NATO members, such as Britain and France, deployed in Ukraine, would not themselves enjoy the NATO Article 5 guarantee.

Then came a snap of the pup sold down the river, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, left, French President Emmanuel Macron and Trump in 2024. Picture: AFP

The bromancer got gloomier and gloomier as it all sank in ...

In other words, if Russian forces, in uniform or in the minimal disguise of gray zone conflict mufti, should attack European NATO troops, those NATO troops would not enjoy NATO protection. Thus their effect in disincentivising Putin from one day resuming conflict is much diminished. It may be that the Trump administration felt that without this caveat, the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine could effectively grant Ukraine de facto NATO membership. But again, where is the strategic, negotiating sense in ceding this to Putin in advance?
Even Trump directly talking to Putin without the involvement of Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, echoes the worst American practices of the past in negotiating weak allies’ fates rather than letting allies negotiate for themselves.
As against that, almost as soon as he’d spoken to Putin, Trump rang Zelensky.
On top of all this, Trump and Putin committed to “visiting each others’ countries”. That brings an end to the campaign to isolate Putin, to make him pay a diplomatic price for his military aggression. And the Americans certainly won’t be enforcing any International Criminal Court arrest warrant against Putin.

And you can bet the bromancer's bottom dollar that King Donald I won't lift a finger, should Xi decide to make a move on Taiwan (and watch out Red White and Blueland). The reptiles couldn't get enough of the two sociopaths together ... Trump and Putin arrive for a meeting in Helsinki in 2018. Picture: AFP

By this point the pond was ready for the comedy in NPR's story, Red, White and Blueland? Trump's Greenland talk sparks some colorful proposals

...Some Danes are now flipping the script, suggesting their leaders buy California and turn it into "New Denmark." More than 220,000 people had signed the satirical petition as of Wednesday morning.
The petition aims to gather 500,000 signatures and raise "$1 trillion (give or take a few billion)" in support of what it calls "Denmark's Next Big Adventure."
"Have you ever looked at a map and thought, 'You know what Denmark needs? More sunshine, palm trees, and roller skates.' Well, we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make that dream a reality," its website says. "Let's buy California from Donald Trump!"
Why California? The petition lists a few reasons, including its year-round sunshine, tech dominance, avocado supply ("avocado toast forever") and Disneyland ("we'll rename it Hans Christian Andersenland").
Trump has had no shortage of critical words for California, which voted against him three times. He has accused Democrats of destroying the state, even calling it "Paradise Lost" on the campaign trail.
He has long feuded with its Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, most recently blaming him for the scale of the wildfires that devastated Los Angeles in January and threatening to tie federal aid to voter ID. Newsom, in turn, signed two laws last week setting aside $50 million for legal battles against the second Trump administration.
The petition borrows some language from Trump, like calling its plan "tremendous," including "bigly" in its email address and brandishing the slogan "Måke Califørnia Great Ægain." It says it is in Denmark's national interest to promote its heritage by turning California into New Denmark and L.A. into Løs Ångeles.
"We'll bring hygge to Hollywood, bike lanes to Beverly Hills, and organic smørrebrød to every street corner," it says. "Rule of law, universal health care and fact based politics might apply."
The website includes fake testimonials of support from celebrities — like Danish-born Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich and Danish-American actor Viggo Mortensen — and imaginary people, including Sven the Viking and Karen from Accounting.
It's not clear who the organizers of the petition are. Their website, Denmarkification.com, cheekily says they are located "somewhere on Earth, for strategic and economic reasons." And they are upfront about it being satire, with a disclaimer reading "This campaign is 100% real… in our dreams."

Speaking of dreams, they were also in the bromancer's mind ...

All this constitutes Putin’s fondest diplomatic dream.
Yet what has Putin given in return? So far, nothing at all.
It may be that the Trump administration feels peace is more likely if Putin is thoroughly reassured. But Putin had absolutely nothing to need reassurance about when he decided to invade Ukraine. The invasion originated in Putin’s bizarre ideological fixations, in his routine dictator’s desire for ever greater power, and in his worry, not that Ukraine would become a military threat to Russia, but that it would become a successful Western facing society which would remind his own people of how much they’ve had to give up under Putin.
You would have to think Trump has given Putin great strength in the forthcoming negotiations.
For all that, Trump would surely argue that each negotiation is unique. Trump believes he understands Putin and can do business with him. And of course, every single thing that Trump has given to Putin, Trump can take back from Putin.
It has also always been a deep part of Trump’s strategic thinking to try to bring Russia out of China’s orbit, or at least lessen the degree of Beijing’s influence in Moscow.
If Trump finally can bring about an end to the fighting, with Ukraine secure behind albeit diminished borders, and Putin somewhat resocialised into polite international company, and all of that is a huge, huge if, then Trump’s highly individualistic and unorthodox practices will have been worthwhile.
But it all has the look of a huge gamble.

You have to admire the bromancer, always willing to think that King Donald I is playing 5D chess. You need to be as wretchedly stupid as the bromancer routinely is to have that level of imagination. Here, have a cartoon for a break, courtesy the immortal Rowe referencing that mint moment ...

The break was needed, because this is a momentous day for the pond...

It was business as usual in the alleged "news" portion ... a clucking about the NDIS ...

Over on the extreme far right, the pond almost wept with joy and relief ...

Our Henry was back and top of the reptile digital world ma.

And Killer had dropped in from the IPA.

It was a cornucopia of Killer riches, and so the pond could avoid Tony blathering about greenies, and that well-known theologian Jack the Insider explaining Christ to Xians ...

Immediately the pond was confronted with a Killer question.

Do the reptiles acknowledge that Killer's now a hack hacking out of Gina's IPA? 

Of course not, it's Killer business as usual in US ‘support’ did Ukraine no favours in Russian war, Unfortunately Henry Kissinger’s famous quip in the wake of the Vietnam War, that ‘to be America’s enemy is dangerous, to be its friend is fatal’, looks like it will prove true for Ukraine as well.

The bromancer had some saucy doubts and fears, but Killer had none, as once again the two sociopaths starred, Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) and US President Donald Trump are pictured before a meeting in Helsinki in 2018. Picture: AFP

Killer was as pleased as punch, though he bravely failed to mention measles were on the march, or the dangers of vaccines and masks. 

He'd much prefer that Ukraine had simply waved the white flag from the get go ... you know, instead of causing a ruckus, like Poland did back in 1939...

If Barbara Tuchman were still alive to update her classic book on cases of geopolitical stupidity and miscalculation, The March of Folly, she’d surely have to include a chapter on Ukraine.
If Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin negotiate an end to the three-year war on Ukraine on terms that keep it outside NATO and allow Russia to maintain the eastern Ukrainian territories it has occupied, as now appears likely, former president Joe Biden’s policy of arming Ukraine to fight Russia will go down as one of the epic tragedies of modern history.
The weapons industry has raked in billions of dollars throughout but after almost three years of bloody fighting, hundreds of thousands of deaths and vast socio-economic destruction, Ukraine appears set to end up in a position far worse than it could have by negotiation.
While barely reported by some warmongering media – which typically casts Putin as Adolf Hitler seeking to conquer Europe – the Russian leader explicitly put an ultimatum to the US and NATO in December 2021 that demanded Kyiv give up on its NATO ambitions, which would’ve ultimately led to US troops and missiles based in the former Soviet republic.
Indeed that – along with Russia’s withdrawal from most of the Donbas – was more or less what was agreed between Russia and Ukraine in a peace treaty agreed by both nations’ negotiators in Istanbul two months after the war began, which was shamefully scuttled by Britain and the US.

Fancy casting Vlad the sociopath as a warmonger. 

Why in Killer's alternative universe, it's well known that it was the Ukrainian Nazis that invaded mother Russia, so what else could Vlad the Impaler do? 

Cue an AV from that alternative universe, US President Donald Trump has commented on whether Ukraine should have a NATO membership. “I don’t think it’s practical to have it personally,” he told reporters on Wednesday, local time. “It certainly would seem to be that most people have said that that’s something that’s not going to happen.”

It's all Ukraine's fault and they deserve what they're gunna get ... and don't talk to Killer about fairness, he's an IPA man these days, and he loves brutalism ...

Surely, given the consequent devastation, these arrangements might have been worth a try.

Ukraine, which is around three times poorer than even Russia in terms of GDP per capita, will likely be stripped by the US of its valuable rare earth and mineral deposits as the Trump administration seeks compensation for the billions of dollars of failed support.
US policy has predictably pushed Russia into an alliance with China, a development once considered anathema for Western interests everywhere.
Even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has conceded he received barely half the aid money allocated, pointing to fraud on a potentially massive scale, which could further undermine confidence in the wisdom of US interventionism.
The US and allied governments have spent (borrowed) the equivalent of around five times Australia’s annual defence budget for these outcomes.
In March 2022, I wrote: “Sending arms and cheering on the Ukrainians to fight from afar fuel(led) needless deaths and delays the inevitable. The tough penalties on Russia imposed by the US and its allies are penalties on the whole world, prolonging the conflict and pushing Russia into China’s arms.”
In August 2023, I wrote: “Russia’s military advantage appears insurmountable in troops and artillery without mobilising, and sanctions appear to have failed … The sad reality is Moscow’s interests and arguments, whether we agree with them or not, will need to be taken into account in Ukraine, at least as much as Washington’s.”

Put it another way ..

As for fairness, bullies gunna be bullies and Killer gunna be in the playground cheering the bullies on, and explaining to the teacher that 'no fair' rulez the playground jungle ...

None of this might be “fair”, especially when it comes to relations between great and small powers. The US since WWII has bombed or invaded at least a half dozen countries, often without the blessing of international law, to ensure its own influence.
Russia, long paranoid about foreign threats given its huge size yet relatively small population, should be condemned for breaking international law but its invasion was predictable and provoked. Former US ambassador to Moscow William Burns observed in a private memo in 2008 that Ukraine in NATO was “the brightest of all red lines” among the Russian political elite, a view shared by numerous serious scholars over many decades. Yet Biden encouraged it anyway.
The CIA had built 12 secret spy bases in Ukraine, according to The New York Times, and the State Department had spent billions helping foment a pro-US uprising against the government in 2014. Would the US tolerate such meddling by China or Russia in the Caribbean or Canada?
Those who backed “standing with Ukraine”, usually by sitting at their computers on the other side of the world contributing nothing to the fight, implied theirs was the moral position. That’s not necessarily true.
The reality was the US government has been paying the Ukrainian government to sometimes physically drag its own young men off the street to fight Russia in an unwinnable war purely to “weaken Russia”, as former defence secretary Lloyd Austin put it in April 2022.

So much better to do what Killer does, preach lickspittle surrender and quisling fellow travelling from Gina's keyboard as he sits at his computer on the other side of the world, contributing his best effort at fawning all over Vlad the sociopath...

Why if it weren't for the IPA he might have been a star on RT ...

Cue a snap of a man Killer must surely loath, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky attends a meeting with the US Secretary of Treasury in Kyiv. Picture: AFP

How dare that dangerous upstart cause such trouble to Vlad the impaler, and to Killer, kneeling to kiss Vlad's ring...

Indeed, the Biden administration later publicly called for Ukraine to lower its draft age to 18 from 24, a move Kyiv was reluctant to do because it has so few young men in that age cohort.
It’s not clear Russia has been weakened, either. To be sure, it has lost many thousands of men, although a big share of the dead were among the worst criminals in Russia, drawn from jails, a policy some might see as killing two birds with one stone.
The severe sanctions that were meant to cripple Moscow have caused as much damage to Europe as they have to Russia, and Russia’s military is now more experienced, possibly more advanced, than it was before. They’ve encouraged BRICS nations to seek to divest away from the US dollar.
There has never been a shred of actual evidence (or logic) behind the claim that Russia, often cast in the Western media as on the verge of collapse, is planning to invade the rest of Europe.
Hitler had to amass over a million troops to conquer Poland, a much smaller country than Ukraine; Putin’s invading force of over 100,000 in early 2022 was probably intended to cow Kyiv into giving up its NATO aspirations.
Unfortunately Henry Kissinger’s famous quip in the wake of the Vietnam War, that “to be America’s enemy is dangerous, to be its friend is fatal”, looks like it will prove true for Ukraine as well.

Killer's right about one thing. The Biden administration was deplorable in several matters, Ukraine and Gaza, but did any quivering lickspittle back in Adolf's day manage that level of pandering?

Putin’s invading force of over 100,000 in early 2022 was probably intended to cow Kyiv into giving up its NATO aspirations.

It wasn't an invasion, it was just a moo-cowing?

Was that a measure of Vlad the Invader's delusion? Nah, not in Killer's alternative universe ...

Oh he's Gina's boy now, he's gone full Gina ...

Here have a break, have a "men of steel" moment ,courtesy the infallible Pope...

The pond needed that break because it's a momentous day, with the return of Killer topped by the return of our Henry to fix all the holes in all the buckets in your favourite new Gaza holiday resort.

Remarkably our Henry manages to outdo Killer, as he kisses the ring and fondles the genitals of King Donald I in Trump’s Gaza plan better than resumption of war, As well as being consistent with the history of post war reconstruction and recovery, the president’s plan opens a path to a better future for the region.

Yep, he's taking it all terribly seriously and no doubt is looking forward to a few cocktails on the Gaza Riviera in due course, a few tosses of the die, as the reptiles flung in one of Frank's terrible illustrations, US President Donald Trump set out his plan to redevelop war-torn Gaza during a White House press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Artwork: Frank Ling

Stop it Frank, just stop it, the pond fears blindness is imminent ...

For those who have forgotten - shame on you, failed herpetology students - these are the laws of Henry, to be applied to any read ...

The First Law of Our Henry: “There is no argument that cannot be bolstered by citing a long-deceased notable who had no direct knowledge or experience of the subject under debate.”

The Second Law of Our Henry: "When citing historical sources, always ensure you include sufficient persons and verbiage to camouflage your exclusion of any inconvenient facts that do not support your arguments.” The discoverer of the law suggests this might be a more polite way of saying “Flood the zone with shit”, but correctly concedes a scholarly gent like Henry would never stoop to such crudity. They would prefer the genteel and concise summary offered by a learned correspondent, “Deluge the sphere with ordure”.

Some might prefer that in Latin, with the googlebot suggesting "inundare in zona cum stercore" and for Francophiles "inonder la zone de merde."

Whatever, observe our Henry in action by heading back to Lisbon in 1755 ...

In what can only be described as a Pavlovian reaction, Donald Trump’s proposed reconstruction of Gaza has elicited howls of outrage, from Hamas’s terrorists at one end of the spectrum to European leaders at the other.
With “experts” interviewed by The New York Times denouncing the proposals as “a violation of international law, a war crime and a crime against humanity”, one might be forgiven for thinking the President had advocated the slaughter of Gaza’s widows and orphans.
But back in what we pre-postmodern types call reality, the evacuation of devastated areas is hardly unusual. Recovery from natural disasters is an obvious case in point. From the clearing of Lisbon after the earthquake of 1755, which opened the way to the city’s brilliant reconstruction, through to the response to Hurricane Katrina, which displaced 1.2 million people, recovery has almost always required evacuating the inhabitants of the affected areas.

Ethnic cleansing?

Our Henry is up for it, but not before an AV distraction ...

UnHerd Newsroom editor James Billot warns the end of the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas could lead to a “very ugly” escalation. His comments follow Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's statement that fighting will resume in Gaza if hostages are not released by Saturday. “This was a three-phase ceasefire. The first phase had gone off without much hiccup but there was always this expectation or fear rather that the second phase would never go forward because there was always a bit more of a sticky issue with the exchange of prisoners and hostages,” Mr Billot said. “I don’t like where this is going, we seem to be breaking what was a very temporary truce and ceasefire. “It could get very ugly, I would not dismiss any of Trump’s threats.”

Now on with the ethnic cleansing, piously explained and theologically justified ...

That is even more clearly true in dealing with the damage wreaked by wars, which so often leave a legacy of unexploded ordinance, tottering buildings and contaminated water supplies.
Already in rebuilding those parts of France laid to waste in World War I, the broad rule was that where more than a third of structures had been severely affected the area should be cleared of inhabitants, preventing injuries and allowing systematic redevelopment.
The lessons of that experience helped shape the reconstruction of Europe and Japan at the end of World War II. With strikes against heavily populated cities taking place on an unprecedented scale, aerial bombardment and savage land battles had shattered urban areas. It was apparent to post-war planners that rebuilding devastated cities would require temporary, and in the worst-affected cases permanent, population movements.
Nor were those movements necessarily, or even normally, voluntary. In the occupied areas, they were typically mandated and enforced by the occupying authorities. But the British experience is telling of what was done even in longstanding democracies.
Thus, addressing the House of Commons in January 1941, Winston Churchill stressed that the goal of rebuilding was not to “to make a new world, comprising a new Heaven, a new Earth, and no doubt a new hell (as I am sure that would be necessary in any balanced system)”; rather, the policy framework had to enable “a number of large practical steps which it is indispensable to take”.
The result was the Town and Country Planning Act 1944, which was commonly referred to as the “Blight and Blitz” Act, since it encompassed both repairing war damage and clearing cities of slums.
That legislation allowed areas to be declared for demolition with little or no compensation for those losing their homes. Tenants, who accounted for 75 per cent of the affected population, were not even entitled to be informed that demolition orders were being considered, much less granted meaningful rights of appeal.

Um, is there some distinction between what a government might do to is own citizens, and what sociopathic governments might do to citizens of another state?

Put it a way that our Henry might understand ...

That German legislation allowed areas to be declared for demolition with little or no compensation for those losing their homes ... and for Jews to be cleansed from the earth. 

Never mind, it looks like they urgently need rehousing in some nearby desert, Palestinians walk amid the devastation in Beit Hanun in the northern Gaza Strip. Picture: AFP

Meanwhile, Henry was still full of historical analogies ... going the full mango Mussolini dreaming, the full cleansing embodied in "would have already been resettled in far safer and more beautiful communities, with new and modern homes, in the region"...

And while new housing was to be built, there was no requirement to rehouse the hundreds of thousands of families evicted. Indeed, it was not until the Land Compensation Act 1973 – which was passed once post-war reconstruction had been safely completed – that tenants evicted by area clearance orders received a statutory right to be offered an alternative.
It requires considerable ignorance to believe the UK example, which was not particularly draconian by continental standards, only pertains to a grim, long buried past. The reconstruction that followed the conflicts in what had been Yugoslavia shows the opposite is true.
“Although we have previously been unwilling to countenance population transfers,” Madeleine Albright (the US representative to the United Nations) declared as a resolution of those conflicts was being designed, mandatory population movements are, if they facilitate a durable recovery, “politically and morally defensible”.
Reflecting those convictions, the 1994 Washington Agreement, which set the basis for rebuilding war-ravaged Mostar in Bosnia-Herzegovina, granted a European Union-nominated Administrator virtually unchecked powers over the reconstruction process.
The Administrator was required to consult local representatives, but had no obligation to take their advice, including on the designation of areas for clearing, demolition and redevelopment. Nor were the Administrator’s decisions subject to appeal, thus preventing local demagogues from sabotaging the recovery process, as they would otherwise have surely done.
The result was timely reconstruction. However, looking back, John Yarwood, who led the rebuilding effort, concluded that instead of eventually returning the city’s inhabitants to their former homes, it would have been better to permanently transfer a much greater share of the population out of areas plagued by ancient enmities and controlled by the stirrers of hatred.
“Surely it is preferable to have a safe house in a new area now than to have your old house in an unsafe area some time in the future,” he argued in a careful review of his broad-ranging experience with post-conflict reconstruction. Additionally, and even more importantly, “Making normal, everyday, people feel safe will allow authentic, unforced co-operation to begin and flourish, isolating extremists and allowing moderates gradually to take over”.

Can it get any more disgraceful? Sure can ... The remains of the Prefectural Industry Promotion Building after the bombing of Hiroshima.

Just for a moment our Henry has a blinding moment, an intense and destructive flash of light...

That won’t, of course, cut any ice with Hamas, whose interests lie in perpetuating the misery that inflames the people of Gaza and ensures the flow of aid that finances its terrorist activities.
Nor will it calm the Arab states and their allies, who posture as staunch defenders of the Palestinian cause. They didn’t have a critical word to say in 1991 when Kuwait, in retaliation for the Palestine Liberation Organisation’s endorsement of Iraq’s attempted annexation, brutally expelled 300,000 Palestinians, driving many into the desert, where they were left to fend for themselves; but a proposal that would require those states to take some responsibility for giving Gazans a worthwhile future leaves them foaming at the mouth.
And it will scarcely satisfy the many governments, including our own, who insist that Hamas should play no part in Gaza’s governance yet have no strategy whatsoever for transforming that aspiration into reality.
Yes, Trump’s proposal, which is just a concept sketch, is nowhere near perfect. That innumerable details require fleshing out is undeniable.

That's a mild kind of Billy Goat Butt ... positioned as a Tootle "yes, he can" ...

Yes, Trump’s proposal, which is just a concept sketch, is nowhere near perfect. That innumerable details require fleshing out is undeniable.

Oh nowhere near perfect, innumerable details needing fleshing out ...

Please allow the pond to expand a little on the proposal, a little fleshing out if you will, courtesy Al Jazeera...

What has Trump said about his ‘plan’ in Gaza?

Trump has made controversial claims about Gaza, primarily around the idea that the US should take control of the territory, remove its people, and “redevelop” it.
His key points:

• The US should “own” Gaza: He has suggested that the US should take control of Gaza to ensure stability. Palestinians should be relocated. He has proposed moving Gaza’s 2.3 million residents to Egypt and Jordan, arguing they would be “better off”.
• Quote: “The Gaza Strip would be turned over to the US by Israel at the conclusion of fighting” between Israel and Hamas, he posted on social media. He added: “No soldiers by the US would be needed!”
• Quote: “If we can get a beautiful area to resettle people, permanently, in nice homes where they can be happy and not be shot and not be killed and not be knifed to death like what’s happening in Gaza,” he said, not mentioning who is killing Palestinians in Gaza.
• Quote: “I believe we will have a parcel of land in Jordan, a parcel of land in Egypt, we may have someplace else but I think when we finish our talks we’ll have a place where they’ll live very happily.”
• Gaza should be redeveloped into the “Riviera of the Middle East” – “We have an opportunity to do something that could be phenomenal. And I don’t want to be cute. I don’t want to be a wise guy. But the Riviera of the Middle East.”
• No Palestinian-led government – “Hamas has made it so bad, so bad, so dangerous, so unfair to people.”

Why are Trump’s comments generating so much condemnation?

Forced displacement: His proposal to remove Gaza’s population has been called ethnic cleansing by human rights organisations. Under international law, forcibly relocating civilians is a war crime.
Violation of Palestinian rights: Palestinians have a deep connection to their land, Gaza. Removing them would be a second Nakba, mirroring the ethnic cleansing of nearly one million Palestinians by Zionist gangs to clear the way for the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948.
Unrealistic and unworkable: The idea of removing millions of people to build a luxury resort in a war-torn area is widely seen as impractical, detached from reality and “morally unacceptable”, according to Dov Waxman, the director of the Nazarian Center for Israel Studies at UCLA.

What has the response from Gaza been?

Palestinians in Gaza have reacted with anger and rejection to Trump’s comments.
They argue that Gaza is their home and that the proposal ignores their rights and historical connection to the land.
“Where would we even go?” Imad al-Qassas, a 60-year-old father of six, said in Gaza. “Even if the border crossings were opened and voluntary migration was offered, I would never leave, no matter how difficult my situation is.”
Hamas, the governing authority in Gaza, has called Trump’s idea “ridiculous and absurd”.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose mandate extends over parts of the occupied West Bank, said this was a “serious violation of international law”.

What has Israel’s response been?

In the same news conference where Trump made these comments, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu commended them as innovative, and that they were thought on “a much higher level” and were a path worth exploring.
Israel says Gaza poses a threat to its security, and a key objective of the ongoing war is to eliminate any potential future threats.

Could Trump do this?

No, he can’t.
Trump does not have the legal, military, or diplomatic power to enforce his idea.
No authority over Gaza: Gaza is not US territory, and the US has no jurisdiction there. Also, experts argue, the US wouldn’t commit the financial and logistical resources to do this.
Mass relocation is nearly impossible:  In Trump’s mind, it would be possible to force two million Palestinians from their land – most of whom do not want to go.
International laws condemn this:  During a Fox interview Trump said he did not plan to allow Gaza’s population to return. The involuntary deportation or displacement of a civilian population constitutes a breach of international humanitarian law.
Neighbouring countries do not agree: Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia have explicitly rejected the idea, and the US can’t force them to accept it. However, Egypt and Jordan are very reliant on US aid and may need to start looking elsewhere for funding to get away from the US.

What are neighbouring countries saying?

Egypt: Strongly opposes any forced relocation of Palestinians. Egyptian officials said they are working on a “comprehensive vision” for the reconstruction of Gaza that does not involve displacement.
Jordan: King Abdullah II has rejected Trump’s idea. “This is the unified Arab position,” he said in a post on X. “Rebuilding Gaza without displacing the Palestinians and addressing the dire humanitarian situation should be the priority for all.”
Saudi Arabia: The Foreign Ministry said it rejected any attempts to displace the Palestinians from their land and described its stance as “clear and explicit” as well as non-negotiable.

Does any of that phase our Henry? Does he care about lines such as ...

The involuntary deportation or displacement of a civilian population constitutes a breach of international humanitarian law.

Does he pause for a moment and remember that his blather about internal relocation means he's walking in the same ethnic cleansing shoes as the likes of Stalin?

There might be points that can be picked apart in that Al Jazeera summary, but surely the bit about ethnic cleansing should give pause ...

Of course not, our Henry is fully down with it ...

But it is equally undeniable that even temporarily clearing Gaza’s cities would allow ordinance to be defused and Hamas’s massive terror infrastructure to be dismantled. As populations were transferred, weapons could be identified and removed, reducing the terrorists’ access to the means of coercion.
And a new administration, with powers similar to those deployed under the Yugoslav agreements, could be put in place and charged with rebuilding Gaza.
None of that will be easy. However, as things stand, there is only one likely alternative: a resumption, sooner or later, of war. By ensuring that comes to pass, the Pavlovian dismissal of Trump’s proposals is worse than foolish – it is a crime against humanity.

On with the next Nakba, and somebody give our Henry a gun...he's in the mood for a little killing if the bastards won't get out of the way of a bloody good casino and holiday hotel complex ...

And so to end far from King Donald I's moral universe, with Wilcox serving up a cartoon that's a little closer to home ...

Some days the pond would be better off in bed, shirking its herpetology studies ...