Home | About | Donate

The Trump-Putin Meeting and the Fate of the Earth


The Trump-Putin Meeting and the Fate of the Earth

Norman Solomon

Any truthful way to say it will sound worse than ghastly: We live in a world where one person could decide to begin a nuclear war—quickly killing several hundred million people and condemning vast numbers of others to slower painful deaths.

Given the macabre insanity of this ongoing situation, most people don’t like to talk about it or even think about it. In that zone of denial, U.S. news media keep detouring around a crucial reality: No matter what you think of Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin, they hold the whole world in their hands with a nuclear button.


This is the kind of "trump is the anti war option" on the Left that helped elect trump in the first place. It's all us trump critics that want WW3. Solomon has not changed his tune one whit since the election. Still a Trump apologist relying on fear.


You have not changed one whit. You put words in other people's mouths, and denounce them for the ideological crimes you project onto them. It is very much as if you simply did not read what Solomon wrote.

You are living in your own mind, so there is no way to demonstrate to you that you are imposing your imagination on Solomon and then denouncing what you imagine.

But Solomon is right.


So you don't want Trump to negotiate with Putin for cooperation and peace at the G-20 summit since it seems you're calling crap on Solomon here and that's what he's advocating in the article. You'll be one of those who call Trump a stooge of Putin if he and Putin find common ground for peace?


I opposed Clinton's neocon inspired positions of containment of Russia e.g., US led coup in Ukraine, and proposing no fly zones in Syria. I've also opposed in general the anti-Russia narrative especially by Clinton supporters blaming Russia for the wikileaks DNC revelations, while ignoring the evidence revealed about how corrupt DNC was under the direction of Clinton operatives in their activities of undermining Sanders and his supporters.

I also have stated that it is damn obvious that Trump indeed has something to hide (no dossier needed for this observation) relative to decades long shady business relationships with Russians and Trump's motive for any "detente" with Putin/Russia has nothing to do with Trump wanting peace.

Trump? Peace?

That said, of course I hope that there is some kind of ratcheting back of tensions in the upcoming summit including backing off sanctions that hurt the average Russian.

Of course, I want a ratcheting back of military confrontation by both sides that have been occurring.

Any expectation that Trump, TRUMP will succeed in any significant regard in this direction is folly.

I mean it is fine to hope.

Not sure why Solomon doesn't comment on how this Administration has confronted Russia even more directly militarily than the Obama Administration, and has stoked tensions with Russia as per stoking tensions on the Korean Peninsula and in the South China Sea. Russia and China after all have been growing much closer, and are natural allies in the face of US military aggression in "the East".


Promoting Trump as a man for world peace and progress can not be excused as hope.


I read it. Solomon is wrong. As are many Trump apologists here.


So because you don't like Trump, you are against advocating for him to pursue peace. What do you want, for him to pursue war?


This situation has existed for almost 70 years and so far we have survived. But the Cuban missile crisis was a close call. It is really scary to think about the chain of events in that crisis. But, we are still hear. It is of course utterly simple minded just to state we work toward detente with Russia. Before saying anything so basic it is necessary to examine the complexities of the situation. The US is concerned that Russia is putting pressure on countries in Europe. The US is also concerned that Russia is an ally of Syria and Iran. So the US has to deal with Russia in Europe and in the Middle East. Before we can have detente we have to get Russia to back off from Europe and back away from Syria and Iran. If we can succeed at that then some sort of detente may be possible. But not now, We cannot simply say because there is a threat of nuclear war that we should adopt a policy of appeasement when it comes to Russia.


"...one person could decide to begin a nuclear war.."

All the more reason to enact laws to prevent any one person here in the United States from starting mass annihilation.

Trump is the perfect example of why this law is absolutely necessary. Loose cannons need to be decommissioned.


Solomon IS NOT "PROMOTING Trump as a man for world peace and progress."

You make my point very well: You assert, without citation, that a poster or writer is saying something, that they are not in fact saying. Then you denounce them for it.

Everyone here knows this about you.


Always be dubious about anything "everyone knows". Solomons argument, and that of others here, has always been that Trump seeks peace with Russia while those attacking him to do so in pursuit of war with Russia. How is that not promotion of Trump?


You think that's what he is doing? I "don't like" Trump? What the hell can that possibly mean? Do you "like" Trump?


The ICBM in your photo uses a hydrazine/dinitrogen-tetroxide fuel which will kill with one breath, thus everyone wears a plastic suit.
First flight was in March 1962, as a weapon Titan was deactivated 30 years ago, 1987 !
In October 2003 a weather satellite was successfully launched by the last Titan booster.
The USA Nuclear weapon stockpile peaked at 32,040 in 1967; the high for the USSR was 45,000 in 1986. This number will be at 3,620 and 3,350 in 2022.
Hiroshima was a classic 'cut-out' story; we killed over a million Japanese in three hours on March 10th 1945, burning 51 square miles, then burned 106 other cities, and all but one building north of the 38th parallel. The first causality of War are facts. See www meetinghouse
Teach fear, Live by fear? One bomb is one to many, but it is war that we are addicted too, not apocalypse.


Our economy and its construction is based on a military model. It is addicted to war because it works best in that context. And, under that ( stress ) perception of order, what that order really is and so on. Our Gov't spends god know what on The Police & Security State. It couldn't arrange things ( plan, procure, proceed ) without these organizing principles, currently.
We've haven't operated on a peace model in 80 years; what would that ordering of life, government and business, schools and retirement, etc. even look like. Who would lose and who would win in a peace model? Would we all have a national win?
Americans aren't addicted to war, our gov't is. Our economy is, therefore, run like a well-oiled machine. Probably the image of an aircraft carrier would work better than the Titan, for your point about this



Keep in mind the other reason the Doomsday Clock was moved ahead: The worsening Climate Crisis. The present occupants in the White House have literally declared war on the planet and future generations will suffer massively. Anyone with children and grandchildren must speak out and take a stand, to do otherwise is a crime.


I used to admire Norman Solomon, but he is really getting all tin-foil-hat about this crypto (or not-so crypto) Putin loving "new-cold-war-nuclear-war-is-coming" stuff.

The Trump Putin meeting may seal the fate of the earth because both are bosom-buddy global-warming denialist capitalist oligarch authoritarians presiding over the two largest greenhouse gas emitters on a per-capita basis among the major nations - NOT because of a non-existent threat of a US-Russia nuclear war.


Exactly. Global warming, not nuclear war, is what is largely driving the doomsday clock now. I was hoping that Solomon would have mentioned this - and the fact that the occupants of both the White House and Kremlin are global warming denialists. But nope. Solomon has been lost to the tin-foil-hat-Borg.


The only "cooperation" between Trump and Putin will be cooperation in the oligarchical oppression of the people in their own countries, in Syria and other parts of the world - while accelerating greenhouse gas emissions.


I don't know what you mean by "You think that's what he [emphasis added] is doing?"

I don't know what you mean because I don't know who is the antecedent of the pronoun he in your intention; you could mean Solomon or you could mean Trump.

I'll respond to both.

"You think that's what Solomon is doing?" Yes, I do. Is advocating that when Trump and Putin meet that they both negotiate for peace between the two powers. In fact he's not only advocating for that himself, but he is promoting a movement that is petitioning both leaders to do this.

Now I doubt you meant that first reading of your statement. I doubt it because it is obvious that is what Solomon is doing. Also you seemed focused on shaming anyone who in your mind supports Trump, and you are trying to shame me, so it's more likely you mean the other reading. But I answered this because it was what Solomon is doing that I've been discussing. But I'll respond to the other reading.

"You think that's what Trump is doing?" Well, I never said that Trump is working for peace in the summit and we ought to be all supportive of him, praising him, and being grateful that he is president. You seem to want me to be saying that so you can then counter it as nonsense and idiocy. But I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that the paramount issue of our time is stopping this new cold war and deescalating tension with and hatred of Russia and we all ought to be doing all we can, like Solomon calls us, to encourage Trump to do that.

You obviously don't like Trump. It's not just some of his policies you despise. You obvious despise him and so refuse to see that he might have a policy that is good or refuse to see any value in working to get him to do something that is good.

In my opinion the worst president of my lifetime was George W. Bush. The man disgusted me when he spoke. I couldn't stand him. His starting the GWOT is inexcusable and the fellow ought to be rotting in a prison cell for war crimes because of that illegal, immoral, and terrible act. But I can and have still praised him for the few things he did that were good, like increasing aid for working against AIDS in Africa. But if my dislike of Bush was paramount I couldn't do that.

I can praise Nixon for the EPA. I can praise Bush Sr. for the Americans With Disabilities Act. I can praise LBJ for Medicare. I can praise Hillary, who I also despise, for being pro-choice.

Yes, I am accusing you of being primarily opposed to Trump rather than opposed to his policies and willing to support what he does that is good if he does something good, even opposed to encouraging him to do something good. You see, that interferes with you demonizing the man. That seems to be what is occurring in this thread.

Actually I have never liked the man. I would mute the TV when commercials with him in them for his reality show came on, because I couldn't stand hearing his voice.

Yet I still can hope he'll do something right and be glad if he does. I liked that he supported ending the TPP. I like he is considering increasing tariffs. I liked that he said he was against regime change wars and grieve he's been co-opted into such thinking on Syria. I liked that he called for working with Russia and still hope that he might do that, hope enough to join with Solomon in encouraging that.

I dislike just about everything else he does. I am 100% opposite him on immigration, Muslims, pipelines, Transgender rights, refugees, healthcare, hatred of Iran and support of the Saudis.