I asked Copilot

how might nations best negotiate with Trump considering his
prediliction for bullying to achieve his ends

Negotiating with someone who employs a forceful or domineering style,
like Trump, often requires a strategic approach. Nations might
consider these tactics:

1. **Project Strength**: Trump respects strength and decisiveness.
Nations could present clear, firm positions while avoiding unnecessary confrontation.

2. **Appeal to Interests**: Highlighting mutual benefits and framing
agreements as "wins" for both sides could align with his preference
for deal-making.

3. **Leverage Relationships**: Building personal rapport can be
effective, as Trump values individual connections and loyalty.

4. **Stay Prepared**: Anticipating his negotiation style and being
ready to counter high-pressure tactics can help maintain balance.

5. **Control the Narrative**: Trump often focuses on public
perception. Nations might use media and public statements to shape the narrative in their favor.

Diplomacy is a delicate art, especially with strong personalities.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The USA will ALWAYS have at least one true friend who remembers the friendliness.
kindness and hospitality of the populace there towards him when he
frequently visited there and lived there for a period too

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 7:20:52 +0000, Dean wrote:

The Apricot Antichrist is kicking the asses of America's allies and
kissing the asses of its enemies. The vast majority of Americans

If it was really a "vast majority" he wouldn't be president again.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 07:02:04 +0000, mariabus@blueyonder.co.uk (Roger)
wrote:

The USA will ALWAYS have at least one true friend who remembers the >friendliness.
kindness and hospitality of the populace there towards him when he
frequently visited there and lived there for a period too

This isn't about you, Roger Ford, but rather the UK and other nations
as a whole. There remains the unsettling possibility that Putin could physically (nuke, carpet missile or cause that big wave) and
politically (by establishing a pro-Kremlin puppet government in
London) HARM THE UK without facing repercussions from the USA.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 16:03:45 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 7:20:52 +0000, Dean wrote:

The Apricot Antichrist is kicking the asses of America's allies and
kissing the asses of its enemies. The vast majority of Americans

If it was really a "vast majority" he wouldn't be president again.

If there was an election today, going by recent polls, Trump would
not be elected.

(Bruce, I strongly suspect that, if you took the trouble to vote, you
voted for Trump in the last three elections)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 22:13:52 +0000, RWC wrote:

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 07:02:04 +0000, mariabus@blueyonder.co.uk (Roger)
wrote:

The USA will ALWAYS have at least one true friend who remembers the >>friendliness.
kindness and hospitality of the populace there towards him when he >>frequently visited there and lived there for a period too

This isn't about you, Roger Ford, but rather the UK and other nations
as a whole.

Sigh! Once more Geoff baulks at even the slightest attempt at gentle
levity being introduced into the discourse

There remains the unsettling possibility that Putin could
physically (nuke, carpet missile or cause that big wave) and
politically (by establishing a pro-Kremlin puppet government in
London) HARM THE UK without facing repercussions from the USA.

But Britain is a nuclear power (albeit a smaller one) too. If Putin
purposely nuked a UK city he would almost certainly lose one of his own
cities in retaliation.

And of course he knows this.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:01:37 +0000, mariabus@blueyonder.co.uk (Roger)
wrote:

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 22:13:52 +0000, RWC wrote:

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 07:02:04 +0000, mariabus@blueyonder.co.uk (Roger)
wrote:

The USA will ALWAYS have at least one true friend who remembers the >>>friendliness.
kindness and hospitality of the populace there towards him when he >>>frequently visited there and lived there for a period too

This isn't about you, Roger Ford, but rather the UK and other nations
as a whole.

Sigh! Once more Geoff baulks at even the slightest attempt at gentle
levity being introduced into the discourse

Once more? Anyway, such levity, even if it existed and was not an
afterthought, is not appropriate. I suppose you, Roger, would have
brought some gentle levity to Kristallnacht in 1938, if you were
around at the time :-)

There remains the unsettling possibility that Putin could
physically (nuke, carpet missile or cause that big wave) and
politically (by establishing a pro-Kremlin puppet government in
London) HARM THE UK without facing repercussions from the USA.

But Britain is a nuclear power (albeit a smaller one) too. If Putin
purposely nuked a UK city he would almost certainly lose one of his own >cities in retaliation.

There are several reasons why the UK might choose not to retaliate
with a nuclear strike, even in the face of such a catastrophic
provocation:

Avoiding Escalation: A nuclear response could lead to a full-scale
nuclear war, potentially involving other nations and resulting in
global devastation. The UK might prioritize de-escalation to prevent
further loss of life.

International Pressure: Allies and international organizations might
urge restraint, advocating for diplomatic or conventional military
responses instead. The UK might consider the broader geopolitical
consequences of a nuclear retaliation.

Moral and Ethical Considerations: The UK might weigh the moral
implications of targeting civilian populations in retaliation, even if provoked. Such a decision could have long-term repercussions on its
global standing and values.

Dependence on NATO and the USA: The UK is a key member of NATO, and
any nuclear response might require consultation with allies,
particularly the USA. The UK might rely on collective defense measures
rather than acting unilaterally.

Alternative Strategies: The UK could opt for severe economic
sanctions, cyber warfare, or targeted conventional military strikes as
a means of response, avoiding the irreversible consequences of nuclear
warfare.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)