What Ukraine Did to Russia at SIVERSK Will Echo for 100 Years.
Ukraine executed a calculated tactical withdrawal in SIVERSK—and turned Russia’s claimed victory into a deadly trap. As Russian forces pushed in, Ukrainian drones, artillery, and precision strikes transformed the city into one of the most lethal kill zones of the war. This video breaks down how Ukraine outmaneuvered Russia in SIVERSK, why Putin’s forces are suffering massive losses, and how this strategy could echo for 100 years across the conflict.
Mostrando postagens classificadas por data para a consulta putin. Ordenar por relevância Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens classificadas por data para a consulta putin. Ordenar por relevância Mostrar todas as postagens
terça-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2026
segunda-feira, 26 de janeiro de 2026
Russia Isn't Collapsing. It's Worse - Jason Jay Smart (The Kyiv Independent)
Russia Isn't Collapsing. It's Worse.
Jason Jay Smart, Jan 26, 2026
https://www.youtube.com/live/FFORJT5x0Nk
Russia’s war has shifted from a military campaign with a clear end state into a financial countdown driven by money, interest rates, and internal cohesion. As borrowing costs remain dangerously high and inflation continues to bite, the state loses its ability to absorb shocks or hide systemic failures. A persistent 16% policy rate tightens credit and makes refinancing prohibitively expensive while pushing immense stress into payrolls, small firms, and regional budgets. Because defense and security spending remain protected, everything else faces immediate cuts, including repairs, wages, infrastructure, and basic services. This brutal tradeoff accelerates decay and transforms financial pressure into volatile political pressure.
Inside the Kremlin, shrinking cash reserves turn former allies into dangerous rivals. Security elites now compete for control of dwindling resources, and this internal infighting becomes increasingly difficult to conceal. This economic fragility provides the context for expanding sabotage and intimidation operations abroad as the regime widens risk to buy time. The frontline grind delivers compounding costs without a victory to reset elite loyalty. As capacity shrinks in 2026, the regime shifts from strategy to damage control, and the clock becomes visible to everyone.
CHAPTERS:
00:00 - Intro: Putin’s Three-Day War Becomes a Four-Year Trap
01:05 - Russia’s Economic Rot: The Kremlin’s Ticking Clock
03:52 - Russia’s Banking Crisis: High Interest Rates & Toxic Loans
04:31 - Putin’s Military Budget: Can Russia Finance the War?
08:00 - Abandoned by Allies: Why Iran & Syria Can't Help Putin
09:14 - China’s Exit Strategy: Beijing is Not a Lifeboat
Jason Jay Smart, Jan 26, 2026
https://www.youtube.com/live/FFORJT5x0Nk
Russia’s war has shifted from a military campaign with a clear end state into a financial countdown driven by money, interest rates, and internal cohesion. As borrowing costs remain dangerously high and inflation continues to bite, the state loses its ability to absorb shocks or hide systemic failures. A persistent 16% policy rate tightens credit and makes refinancing prohibitively expensive while pushing immense stress into payrolls, small firms, and regional budgets. Because defense and security spending remain protected, everything else faces immediate cuts, including repairs, wages, infrastructure, and basic services. This brutal tradeoff accelerates decay and transforms financial pressure into volatile political pressure.
Inside the Kremlin, shrinking cash reserves turn former allies into dangerous rivals. Security elites now compete for control of dwindling resources, and this internal infighting becomes increasingly difficult to conceal. This economic fragility provides the context for expanding sabotage and intimidation operations abroad as the regime widens risk to buy time. The frontline grind delivers compounding costs without a victory to reset elite loyalty. As capacity shrinks in 2026, the regime shifts from strategy to damage control, and the clock becomes visible to everyone.
CHAPTERS:
00:00 - Intro: Putin’s Three-Day War Becomes a Four-Year Trap
01:05 - Russia’s Economic Rot: The Kremlin’s Ticking Clock
03:52 - Russia’s Banking Crisis: High Interest Rates & Toxic Loans
04:31 - Putin’s Military Budget: Can Russia Finance the War?
08:00 - Abandoned by Allies: Why Iran & Syria Can't Help Putin
09:14 - China’s Exit Strategy: Beijing is Not a Lifeboat
10:37 - The Kremlin's Fatal Error: Putin’s Strategic Dead End
domingo, 25 de janeiro de 2026
Madame IA exame as mentiras de Putin (via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz)
Madame IA exame as mentiras de Putin (via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz):
Quais as principais mentiras (desinformações, 'fake news') ditas ou replicadas pela Rússia, principalmente por Putin, em relação à Ucrânia? Cite pelo menos 20 exemplos de mentiras. Em cada mentira, diga o porquê dela ser mentira (diga a informação correta correspondente). Cite-as preferencialmente em ordem cronológica de início de propagação nas mídias [da respectiva mentira].
https://diplomatizzando.blogspot.com/2026/01/roman-sheremeta-explain-how-putin-lies.html#:~:text=Let%E2%80%99s%20unpack%20why%20this%20is%20false%20on%20multiple%20levels
Desde o início da invasão em larga escala em 2022 e nos anos que a antecederam, o governo de Vladimir Putin tem utilizado uma vasta rede de desinformação para justificar a agressão contra a Ucrânia.
Abaixo, estão 20 das principais mentiras propagadas pelo Kremlin, organizadas em ordem cronológica de disseminação:
"A Ucrânia não é um país real" (2021-2022): Putin afirmou que a Ucrânia é uma invenção de Lênin. Fato: A Ucrânia tem uma história milenar, raízes na Rus de Kiev e declarou independência formal em 1991 com aprovação de 90% da população.
"Genocídio em Donbas" (2021-2022): Alegação de que a Ucrânia estava exterminando falantes de russo no leste. Fato: Observadores da ONU e da OSCE nunca encontraram evidências de genocídio na região.
"Desnazificação" (Fevereiro 2022): Justificativa de que o governo ucraniano é neonazista. Fato: O presidente Volodymyr Zelensky é judeu e perdeu familiares no Holocausto; partidos de extrema-direita têm menos de 2% de apoio eleitoral na Ucrânia.
"Operação Militar Especial" (Fevereiro 2022): Termo usado para evitar a palavra "guerra". Fato: Trata-se de uma invasão em larga escala, com mobilização total e bombardeios a cidades civis, caracterizando uma guerra de agressão.
"A Rússia não ataca alvos civis" (Fevereiro 2022 - Presente): Afirmação constante do Ministério da Defesa russo. Fato: Relatórios da Human Rights Watch documentam milhares de ataques a hospitais, escolas e prédios residenciais.
"Laboratórios de armas biológicas dos EUA na Ucrânia" (Março 2022): Alegação de que aves migratórias seriam usadas para espalhar patógenos. Fato: A Ucrânia possui laboratórios de saúde pública legítimos para prevenção de doenças, sem qualquer evidência de armas biológicas.
"Encenação em Bucha" (Abril 2022): Afirmação de que as imagens de corpos nas ruas eram atores ou montagem. Fato: Imagens de satélite da Maxar e investigações do The New York Times provaram que os corpos estavam lá enquanto as tropas russas ocupavam a cidade.
"Bombardeio do Teatro de Mariupol pela própria Ucrânia" (Março 2022): Alegação de que o Batalhão Azov explodiu o teatro. Fato: Uma investigação da Anistia Internacional concluiu que foi um ataque aéreo russo deliberado contra civis.
"A Ucrânia planeja usar uma 'Bomba Suja'" (Outubro 2022): Alegação de que Kiev preparava um ataque radiológico. Fato: A AIEA (Agência Internacional de Energia Atômica) inspecionou as instalações ucranianas a pedido de Kiev e não encontrou nenhum sinal de tais armas.
"Sanções ocidentais causaram a crise alimentar global" (2022): Putin culpou o Ocidente pela fome na África. Fato: A crise foi causada pelo bloqueio russo aos portos ucranianos e pelo roubo de grãos, já que as sanções não incidem sobre alimentos.
"Milhares de mercenários poloneses e da OTAN lutando" (2023): Tentativa de pintar a guerra como um conflito direto com a OTAN. Fato: Existem voluntários estrangeiros na Legião Internacional, mas não há tropas regulares da OTAN combatendo em solo ucraniano.
"Ucrânia explodiu a Barragem de Kakhovka" (Junho 2023): Alegação de sabotagem ucraniana. Fato: Provas de sismologia e engenharia indicam que a barragem, sob controle russo, foi explodida de dentro para fora por cargas russas.
"A contraofensiva ucraniana falhou totalmente" (Setembro 2023): Putin afirmou que a Ucrânia não teve ganhos. Fato: Embora lenta, a Ucrânia retomou mais de 50% do território ocupado inicialmente e destruiu grande parte da Frota do Mar Negro.
"Zelensky cancelou eleições para ser ditador" (Maio 2024): Crítica ao adiamento das eleições. Fato: A Constituição da Ucrânia e a lei marcial proíbem explicitamente eleições durante uma guerra por questões de segurança e justiça eleitoral.
"Otan prometeu não se expandir nem um centímetro" (Recorrente): Alegação de que o Ocidente quebrou uma promessa. Fato: Nunca houve um tratado formal com tal promessa; o próprio Mikhail Gorbachev confirmou que o tema não foi discutido na época da unificação alemã.
"Ucrânia está vendendo armas ocidentais no mercado negro" (2023-2024): Alegação de que armas da OTAN foram para o Hamas ou cartéis. Fato: O Pentágono e a Europol afirmaram que não há evidências de desvio sistemático de armas pesadas da Ucrânia.
"Envolvimento da Ucrânia no ataque ao Crocus City Hall" (Março 2024): Tentativa de culpar Kiev pelo atentado terrorista em Moscou. Fato: O Estado Islâmico (ISIS-K) assumiu a responsabilidade e publicou vídeos do ataque; os EUA haviam alertado a Rússia sobre o plano do ISIS.
"A Rússia está protegendo a soberania da Ucrânia" (Junho 2024): Putin afirmou que a invasão visa "libertar" o povo. Fato: A Rússia anexou ilegalmente quatro regiões ucranianas (Crimeia, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson e Zaporizhzhia), violando a soberania que diz proteger.
"O Ocidente forçou a Rússia a invadir" (Recorrente): Alegação de "cerco" da OTAN. Fato: A Rússia possui a maior fronteira terrestre do mundo e apenas uma pequena fração dela faz fronteira com países da OTAN; a invasão foi uma escolha soberana de Moscou.
"Rússia nunca recusou negociações" (2024-2025): Putin diz querer a paz. Fato: As condições impostas pela Rússia exigem que a Ucrânia entregue territórios que a Rússia nem sequer ocupa totalmente, o que equivale a uma rendição, não a uma negociação.
Fonte: IA Gemini (Google).
===
Antigamente, o surgimento de ditaduras ocorria normalmente com uma ruptura abrupta de regime. Atualmente, a maioria das ditaduras nasce 'aos poucos', ou seja, há uma erosão das instituições constituídas de modo paulatino (lento, mas constante). Dúvida: Os EUA do governo Trump 2.0 estariam seguindo o caminho desse segundo modo, ou seja, uma erosão lenta, mas constante, das instituições democráticas?
Em 2026, análises de institutos de direitos humanos e ciência política indicam que o segundo governo de Donald Trump apresenta características de erosão democrática gradual, consolidando o que especialistas chamam de autoritarismo do século XXI. Diferente de golpes de Estado clássicos, esse processo ocorre através da utilização das próprias ferramentas democráticas para enfraquecer o sistema por dentro.
- Os principais pontos observados no governo Trump 2.0 que corroboram essa percepção incluem:
Enfraquecimento da Burocracia Estatal: O governo implementou ações para remover proteções de funcionários de carreira, transformando milhares de cargos técnicos em posições de livre nomeação ("at-will"), o que facilita a substituição de servidores experientes por aliados políticos.
Controle e Ataque a Instituições Independentes: Relatos apontam o esvaziamento de órgãos federais através de demissões em massa e cortes de financiamento, além de ataques recorrentes ao Judiciário e à imprensa quando suas decisões ou coberturas são contrárias ao governo.
Governança por Decretos: Trump tem feito uso extensivo de ordens executivas para contornar o escrutínio legislativo, reestruturando agências e alterando marcos regulatórios sem passar pelo Congresso.
Retirada do Cenário Internacional: Em janeiro de 2026, os EUA já haviam se retirado de mais de 60 organizações internacionais, incluindo a OMS e agências da ONU, sinalizando um isolamento que enfraquece normas globais de direitos humanos e governança democrática.
Militarização e Direitos Civis: Houve denúncias sobre o desdobramento de unidades militarizadas em centros urbanos e a erosão de direitos fundamentais, especialmente contra imigrantes e opositores políticos, o que gera um clima de medo e vigilância.
* Embora em 2026 as eleições ainda sejam consideradas livres e as instituições mantenham certa capacidade de resistência, centros de pesquisa como a Universidade de Gotemburgo alertam que, se o ritmo de desmonte de direitos e normas persistir, os Estados Unidos correm o risco de deixar de ser classificados como uma democracia liberal plena.
Fonte: IA Gemini (Google).
- Os links dos materiais que embasaram a resposta [acima] da IA:
https://tcf.org/content/report/centurys-new-democracy-meter-shows-america-took-an-authoritarian-turn-in-2025/
https://globalaffairs.org/commentary/analysis/trump-20-enters-2026-full-force
https://www.correiodamanhacanada.com/um-ano-apos-regresso-de-trump-a-casa-branca-ha-erosao-de-direitos-e-escalada-autoritaria-amnistia-internacional/
https://www.facebook.com/TheHinduBusinessLine/posts/five-takeaways-from-davos-2026-as-trump-dominates-the-agenda/1372071948292852/
https://theafrican.co.za/tvbox/2026-01-20-trump-20-a-year-of-chaos-and-institutional-sabotage/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTIg8w8Fns0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w22HVD8asbU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohZ7tztqVVY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSPmjhNM3Uk&t=49
===
5 Questions for Stephen Kotkin - Peter Robinson (Uncommon Knowledge)
5 Questions for Stephen Kotkin
Recorded on January 14, 2022
Stephen Kotkin is a professor of history at Princeton and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of nine works of history, including the first two volumes of his planned three-volume history of Russian power and Joseph Stalin, Paradoxes of Power, 1878–1928 and Waiting for Hitler, 1929–1941. The premise of this show is simple: Peter Robinson poses five questions to Dr. Kotkin: what Xi Jinping, the president of China believes; what Vladimir Putin believes; whether nuclear weapons are a deterrent in the 21st century; the chances of another American renewal; and Kotkin’s rational basis for loving the United States. It’s a fascinating conversation that delves deep into one of the country’s brightest minds.
For further information:
https://www.hoover.org...
sábado, 24 de janeiro de 2026
Roman Sheremeta explain how Putin lies about the Russian people in Donbas
Roman Sheremeta explain how Putin lies about the Russian people in Donbas.
It is a lie that “russian-speaking” Ukrainians want to be a part of russia.
The Kremlin has pushed a narrative that Ukraine is somehow split into a Ukrainian-speaking West and a russian-speaking East, and that people in those eastern parts should “decide for themselves” whether they want to remain part of Ukraine.
Let’s unpack why this is false on multiple levels.
1) There is no clear “russian-speaking region” with a separate identity.
The idea that Ukraine is clearly divided into Ukrainian-speaking and russian-speaking regions — and that these correspond to distinct peoples with distinct political identities — is a fabrication.
Language use in Ukraine was shaped over decades by Soviet-era policies of russification, not by some natural cultural division. Over time, russian became widely used in cities and industry due to political pressure and institutional incentives, not because people in the East suddenly became russians. Language in Ukraine has always been a gradient, not a hard border.
There is no abrupt linguistic line where one “people” ends and another begins — it’s a smooth transition from west to east that correlates with historical schooling, urbanization, and economic structures, not with an underlying “ethnic or political russian identity.”
Most importantly: speaking russian has never been equivalent to wanting to be part of russia.
2) When Ukraine became independent in 1991, people across the country overwhelmingly chose to be Ukrainian.
On December 1, 1991, Ukrainians voted in a nationwide referendum on independence. The question asked was: “Do you support the Act of Declaration of Independence of Ukraine?”
Over 90 % of those who voted said yes, affirming independence from the Soviet Union. Turnout was high — about 84 % of eligible voters participated.
This was not just in western Ukraine — even in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, regions often cited by russian propaganda as “pro-russia,” the vote for independence was clear and substantial: 84% of people in Donetsk and Luhansk voted for Ukraine to be independent from russia.
Not a single region with significant populations said “no” to independence — even Crimea, the most contested region historically, voted majority for independence.
3) There is no constitutional path for a region of Ukraine to secede by referendum.
Since independence, Ukraine’s Constitution has explicitly protected the country’s territorial integrity. It does not allow parts of Ukraine to unilaterally decide to secede, even by popular vote.
This is not unique to Ukraine — constitutions around the world generally prohibit unilateral secession to protect stable governance and rule of law. So the idea that a “referendum” in some region could legally detach that region from Ukraine is unconstitutional.
4) The so-called “95% voted to join russia” numbers are complete fabrications.
Russian propaganda often claims that “95% of people in Donetsk and Luhansk voted to join russia.” That is just a made up number.
The only votes showing such numbers were so-called referendums organized by russia in 2014 and again after 2022, conducted under occupation, without international observers, without rule of law, and often at gunpoint. These votes have no credibility or legitimacy and are fraudulent, coercive exercises used to justify territorial grabs, not genuine expressions of free will.
So what does all this mean?
There is no natural cultural or linguistic fault line splitting Ukraine into two political nations.
The Soviet policy of russification explains why russian was widely spoken — not some inherent political division.
When given a free, fair choice in 1991, people across Ukraine — including in Donetsk and Luhansk — overwhelmingly chose to be part of an independent Ukrainian state.
Neither international law nor Ukraine’s Constitution allows parts of the country to secede just because someone calls a referendum.
The high “pro-russia” numbers peddled by Kremlin propaganda have no basis in free, unbiased democratic will.
P.S. The photo shows a Ukrainian woman voting in the russian-organized referendum on whether her Ukrainian region should join russia.
sexta-feira, 23 de janeiro de 2026
A Ucrânia traída em Davos - Olena Tregub e Paulo Roberto de Almeida
From: Olena Tregub, Transparency International
“Listening to Western leaders at the Ukrainian Breakfast in Davos left a very bitter aftertaste. You can feel the fear of the US administration in the room, and the fact that almost no one dares to say openly what is obvious: Trump is putting pressure on Ukraine, not on Russia. There were only a few veiled remarks from Sikorski – and almost nothing from anyone else.
Instead, we hear things like the Belgian Prime Minister saying: “Europe is not at war with Russia, therefore we did not confiscate Russian assets.” Or Sikorski claiming that “Europe does not buy Russian energy,” which is simply not true. Then comes the self-congratulation about sanctions, about sanctioning the shadow tanker fleet, while in reality they add a few ships to each new package instead of adopting the radical and long-known solutions that would actually change the situation.
A special moment was the speech of a “special envoy” who said he came only because a friend invited him and he couldn’t refuse. That he and Kushner are like two volunteers, working for free to end the war in Ukraine. That everything is going great, the result is coming soon, and Putin will agree to everything any moment now.
The only voices of reality came from Ukrainian soldiers. One of them said that Europe should not be surprised when the war comes to its own territory, and that Ukraine is currently holding back over a million Russian troops on Europe’s borders. In other words, Ukraine is already de facto the defensive shield of the European Union. Yet on stage, European leaders still spoke about Ukraine as something external: unclear timelines, unclear criteria, fears that Ukraine’s accession could “destabilize” the EU.
It feels like people whose house is already being approached by a maniac have locked themselves inside, while Ukraine is outside, fighting and defending their home. But for them, Ukraine is only a sacred sacrifice: something to praise for courage, for surviving winter without heating, for endurance under terror – but not something they are ready to fully let into their warm and comfortable house.
Their house is too safe, too warm, too comfortable. And somewhere out there, “two savages” – Ukrainians and Russians – are fighting, and maybe it will somehow pass, maybe it will not reach them, maybe the maniac is not really coming for their house after all.
In the end, everyone praised themselves. Everyone talked about how much they support Ukraine. One congressman even said he prays every night. And only one question remains: if the support is so extraordinary, why has Ukraine not yet won?
The honest conclusion came from Niall Ferguson: Putin does not care about speeches in Davos. Ukraine needs weapons.”
=========
Acrescento (PRA): Trump e Putin não decepcionam: são irmãos gêmeos na destruição do multilateralismo e da vida civilizada no mundo. A Europa e os europeus me decepcionam.
A morte do multilateralismo como o conhecíamos - Paulo Roberto de Almeida
A morte do multilateralismo como o conhecíamos
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
A “ONU paralela” de Mister Trump será mais uma degradação do multilateralismo criado em 1945, já abalado pelos atos bárbaros de Putin na Ucrânia e de Netanyahu na Faixa de Gaza.
Teremos alguns anos de horrores na política mundial, enquanto estiverem atuantes as três aberrações pessoais mencionadas acima nominalmente.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Brasília, 23/01/2026
quarta-feira, 21 de janeiro de 2026
A incrível carta de DJT ao primeiro-ministro da Noruega para reclamar não ter ganho o Prêmio Nobel da Paz em 2025 (encaminhado aos embaixadores europeus em Washington) - Heather Cox Richardson (Letters from an American)
A incrível carta de DJT ao primeiro-ministro da Noruega para reclamar não ter ganho o Prêmio Nobel da Paz em 2025 (encaminhado aos embaixadores europeus em Washington)
From: Heather Cox Richardson from Letters from an American <heathercoxrichardson@substack.com>
Date: January 20, 2026 at 1:54:59 AM EST
Late last night, Nick Schifrin of PBS NewsHour posted on social media that the staff of the U.S. National Security Council had sent to European ambassadors in Washington a message that President Donald J. Trump had already sent to Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre of Norway.
The message read:
“Dear Jonas: Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you! President DJT”
==========
Faisal Islam of the BBC voiced the incredulity rippling across social media in the wake of Schifrin’s post, writing: “Even by the standards of the past week, like others, I struggle to comprehend how the below letter on Greenland/Nobel might be real, although it appears to come from the account of a respected PBS journalist… this is what I meant by beyond precedent, parody and reality….” Later, Islam confirmed on live TV that the letter was real and posted on X: “Incredible… the story is actually not a parody.”
International affairs journalist Anne Applebaum noted in The Atlantic the childish grammar in the message, and pointed out—again—that the Norwegian Nobel Committee is not the same thing as the Norwegian government, and neither of them is Denmark, a different country. She also noted that Trump did not, in fact, end eight wars, that Greenland has been Danish for centuries, that many “written documents” establish Danish sovereignty there, that Trump has done nothing for NATO, and that European NATO members increased defense spending out of concern over Russia’s increasing threat.
This note, she writes, “should be the last straw.” It proves that “Donald Trump now genuinely lives in a different reality, one in which neither grammar nor history nor the normal rules of human interaction now affect him. Also, he really is maniacally, unhealthily obsessive about the Nobel Prize.” Applebaum implored Republicans in Congress “to stop Trump from acting out his fantasy in Greenland and doing permanent damage to American interests.” “They owe it to the American people,” she writes, “and to the world.”
Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s doctor Jonathan Reiner agreed: “This letter, and the fact that the president directed that it be distributed to other European countries, should trigger a bipartisan congressional inquiry into presidential fitness.”
Today three top American Catholic cardinals, Blase Cupich of Chicago, Robert McElroy of Washington, D.C., and Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, issued a joint statement warning the Trump administration that its military action in Venezuela, threats against Greenland, and cuts to foreign aid risk bringing vast suffering to the world.
Nicole Winfield and Giovanna Dell’Orto of the Associated Press reported that the cardinals spoke up after a meeting at the Vatican in which several fellow cardinals expressed alarm about the administration’s actions. Cupich said that when the U.S. can be portrayed as saying “‘might makes right’—that’s a troublesome development. There’s the rule of law that should be followed.”
“We are watching one of the wildest things a nation-state has ever done,” journalist Garrett Graff wrote: “A superpower is [dying by] suicide because the [Republican] Congress is too cowardly to stand up to the Mad King. This is one of the wildest moments in all of geopolitics ever.”
In just a year since his second inauguration, Trump has torn apart the work that took almost a century of struggle and painstaking negotiations from the world’s best diplomats to build. Since World War II, generations of world leaders, often led by the United States, created an international order designed to prevent future world wars. They worked out rules to defend peoples and nations from the aggressions of neighboring countries, and tried to guarantee that global trade, bolstered by freedom of the seas, would create a rising standard of living that would weaken the ability of demagogues to create loyal followings.
In August 1941, four months before the U.S. entered World War II, U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt and British prime minister Winston Churchill and their advisors laid out principles for an international system that could prevent future world wars. In a document called the Atlantic Charter, they agreed that countries should not invade each other and therefore the world should work toward disarmament, and that international cooperation and trade thanks to freedom of the seas would help to knit the world together with rising prosperity and human rights.
The war killed about 36.5 million Europeans, 19 million of them civilians, and left many of those who had survived homeless or living in refugee camps. In its wake, in 1945, representatives of the 47 countries that made up the Allies in World War II, along with the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, and newly liberated Denmark and Argentina, formed the United Nations as a key part of an international order based on rules on which nations agreed, rather than the idea that might makes right, which had twice in just over twenty years brought wars that involved the globe.
Four years later, many of those same nations came together to resist Soviet aggression, prevent the revival of European militarism, and guarantee international cooperation across the Atlantic Ocean. France, the U.K., Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg formed a defensive military alliance with the U.S., Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, and Iceland to make up the twelve original signatories to the North Atlantic Treaty. In it, the countries that made up the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) reaffirmed “their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments” and their determination “to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.”
They vowed that any attack on one of the signatories would be considered an attack on all, thus deterring war by promising strong retaliation. This system of collective defense has stabilized the world for 75 years. Thirty-two countries are now members, sharing intelligence, training, tactics, equipment, and agreements for use of airspace and bases. In 2024, NATO countries reaffirmed their commitment and said Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had “gravely undermined global security.”
And therein lies the rub. The post–World War II rules-based international order prevents authoritarians from grabbing land and resources that belong to other countries. But Russia’s president Vladimir Putin, for example, is eager to dismantle NATO and complete his grab of Ukraine’s eastern industrial regions.
Trump has taken the side of rising autocrats and taken aim at the rules-based international order with his insistence that the U.S. must control the Western Hemisphere. In service to that plan, he has propped up Argentina’s right-wing president Javier Milei and endorsed right-wing Honduran president Nasry Asfura, helping his election by pardoning former president Juan Orlando Hernández, a leading member of Asfura’s political party, who was serving 45 years in prison in the U.S. for drug trafficking. Trump ousted Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and seized control of much of Venezuela’s oil, the profits of which are going to an account in Qatar that Trump himself controls.
This week, Trump has launched a direct assault on the international order that has stabilized the world since 1945. He is trying to form his own “Board of Peace,” apparently to replace the United Nations. A draft charter for that institution gives Trump the presidency, the right to choose his successor, veto power over any actions, and control of the $1 billion fee permanent members are required to pay. In a letter to prospective members, Trump boasted that the Board of Peace is “the most impressive and consequential Board ever assembled,” and that “there has never been anything like it!” Those on it would, he said, “lead by example, and brilliantly invest in a secure and prosperous future for generations to come.”
The Kremlin says Putin, whose war on Ukraine has now lasted almost four years and who has been shunned from international organizations since his indictment by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, has received an invitation to that Board of Peace. So has Putin’s closest ally, President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, who Ivana Kottasová and Anna Chernova of CNN note has been called “Europe’s last dictator.” Also invited are Hungary’s prime minister and Putin ally Viktor Orbán as well as Javier Milei.
And now Trump is announcing to our allies that he has the right to seize another country.
Trump’s increasing frenzy is likely coming at least in part from increasing pressure over the fact the Department of Justice is now a full month past the date it was required by law to release all of the Epstein files. Another investigation will be in the news as well, as former special counsel Jack Smith testifies publicly later this week about Trump’s role in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Smith told the House Judiciary Committee in December that he believed a jury would have found Trump guilty on four felony counts related to his actions.
Smith knows what happened, and Trump knows that Smith knows what happened.
Trump’s fury over the Nobel Peace Prize last night was likely fueled as well by the national celebration today of an American who did receive that prize: the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. The Nobel Prize Committee awarded King the prize in 1964 for his nonviolent struggle for civil rights for the Black population in the U.S. He accepted it “with an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind,” affirming what now seems like a prescient rebuke to a president sixty years later, saying that “what self-centered men have torn down men other-centered can build up.”
Trump did not acknowledge Martin Luther King Jr. Day this year.
While the walls are clearly closing in on Trump’s ability to see beyond himself, he and his loyalists are being egged on in their demand for the seizure of Greenland by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who is publicly calling for a return to a might-makes-right world. On Sean Hannity’s show on the Fox News Channel today, Miller ignored the strength of NATO in maintaining global security as he insisted only the U.S. could protect Greenland.
He also ignored the crucial fact that the rules-based international order has been instrumental in increasing U.S.—as well as global—prosperity since 1945. With his claim that “American dollars, American treasure, American blood, American ingenuity is what keeps Europe safe and the free world safe,” Miller is erasing the genius of the generations before us. It is not the U.S. that has kept the world safe and kept standards of living rising: it is our alliances and the cooperation of the strongest nations in the world, working together, to prevent wannabe dictators from dividing the world among themselves.
Miller is not an elected official. Appointed by Trump and with a reasonable expectation that Trump will pardon him for any crimes he commits, Miller is insulated both from the rule of law and, crucially, from the will of voters. The Republican congress members Applebaum called on to stop Trump are not similarly insulated.
Tonight Danish troops—the same troops who stood shoulder to shoulder with U.S. troops in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021—arrived in Greenland to defend the island from the United States of America.
Notes:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/01/trump-letter-to-norway/685676/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/22/honduras-elections-leftist-party-libre
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/19/europe/putin-board-of-peace-gaza-trump-intl
https://www.icc-cpi.int/defendant/vladimir-vladimirovich-putin
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/1941/08/14/the-atlantic-charter
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/nato-history/a-short-history-of-nato
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1964/summary/
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1964/king/acceptance-speech/
https://eng.belta.by/president/view/trumps-letter-to-lukashenko-full-text-and-what-it-means-175942-2026/
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/us-catholic-cardinals-urge-trump-administration-embrace-moral-129346423
https://www.politico.eu/article/denmark-to-boost-military-presence-in-greenland/
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/1949/04/04/the-north-atlantic-treaty
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/2024/07/10/washington-summit-declaration
https://fortune.com/2026/01/17/trump-nations-1-billion-membership-payment-peace-board-united-nations/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-17/trump-wants-nations-to-pay-1-billion-to-stay-on-his-peace-board
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/2025-12/Smith-Depo-Transcript_Redacted-w-Errata.pdf
X:
nickschifrin/status/2013107018081489006
faisalislam/status/2013143632522445099
faisalislam/status/2013177130536890877
Bluesky:
joycewhitevance.bsky.social/post/3mcs5zlstp224
ronfilipkowski.bsky.social/post/3mcslnjb2622n
gtconway.bsky.social/post/3mcsmygfb3c2k
vermontgmg.bsky.social/post/3mcsqlpp6ls2g
noelreports.com/post/3mcsndx5qcs2e
antongerashchenko.bsky.social/post/3mcse2pf5js2v
“Dear Jonas: Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you! President DJT”
==========
Faisal Islam of the BBC voiced the incredulity rippling across social media in the wake of Schifrin’s post, writing: “Even by the standards of the past week, like others, I struggle to comprehend how the below letter on Greenland/Nobel might be real, although it appears to come from the account of a respected PBS journalist… this is what I meant by beyond precedent, parody and reality….” Later, Islam confirmed on live TV that the letter was real and posted on X: “Incredible… the story is actually not a parody.”
International affairs journalist Anne Applebaum noted in The Atlantic the childish grammar in the message, and pointed out—again—that the Norwegian Nobel Committee is not the same thing as the Norwegian government, and neither of them is Denmark, a different country. She also noted that Trump did not, in fact, end eight wars, that Greenland has been Danish for centuries, that many “written documents” establish Danish sovereignty there, that Trump has done nothing for NATO, and that European NATO members increased defense spending out of concern over Russia’s increasing threat.
This note, she writes, “should be the last straw.” It proves that “Donald Trump now genuinely lives in a different reality, one in which neither grammar nor history nor the normal rules of human interaction now affect him. Also, he really is maniacally, unhealthily obsessive about the Nobel Prize.” Applebaum implored Republicans in Congress “to stop Trump from acting out his fantasy in Greenland and doing permanent damage to American interests.” “They owe it to the American people,” she writes, “and to the world.”
Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s doctor Jonathan Reiner agreed: “This letter, and the fact that the president directed that it be distributed to other European countries, should trigger a bipartisan congressional inquiry into presidential fitness.”
Today three top American Catholic cardinals, Blase Cupich of Chicago, Robert McElroy of Washington, D.C., and Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, issued a joint statement warning the Trump administration that its military action in Venezuela, threats against Greenland, and cuts to foreign aid risk bringing vast suffering to the world.
Nicole Winfield and Giovanna Dell’Orto of the Associated Press reported that the cardinals spoke up after a meeting at the Vatican in which several fellow cardinals expressed alarm about the administration’s actions. Cupich said that when the U.S. can be portrayed as saying “‘might makes right’—that’s a troublesome development. There’s the rule of law that should be followed.”
“We are watching one of the wildest things a nation-state has ever done,” journalist Garrett Graff wrote: “A superpower is [dying by] suicide because the [Republican] Congress is too cowardly to stand up to the Mad King. This is one of the wildest moments in all of geopolitics ever.”
In just a year since his second inauguration, Trump has torn apart the work that took almost a century of struggle and painstaking negotiations from the world’s best diplomats to build. Since World War II, generations of world leaders, often led by the United States, created an international order designed to prevent future world wars. They worked out rules to defend peoples and nations from the aggressions of neighboring countries, and tried to guarantee that global trade, bolstered by freedom of the seas, would create a rising standard of living that would weaken the ability of demagogues to create loyal followings.
In August 1941, four months before the U.S. entered World War II, U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt and British prime minister Winston Churchill and their advisors laid out principles for an international system that could prevent future world wars. In a document called the Atlantic Charter, they agreed that countries should not invade each other and therefore the world should work toward disarmament, and that international cooperation and trade thanks to freedom of the seas would help to knit the world together with rising prosperity and human rights.
The war killed about 36.5 million Europeans, 19 million of them civilians, and left many of those who had survived homeless or living in refugee camps. In its wake, in 1945, representatives of the 47 countries that made up the Allies in World War II, along with the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, and newly liberated Denmark and Argentina, formed the United Nations as a key part of an international order based on rules on which nations agreed, rather than the idea that might makes right, which had twice in just over twenty years brought wars that involved the globe.
Four years later, many of those same nations came together to resist Soviet aggression, prevent the revival of European militarism, and guarantee international cooperation across the Atlantic Ocean. France, the U.K., Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg formed a defensive military alliance with the U.S., Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, and Iceland to make up the twelve original signatories to the North Atlantic Treaty. In it, the countries that made up the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) reaffirmed “their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments” and their determination “to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.”
They vowed that any attack on one of the signatories would be considered an attack on all, thus deterring war by promising strong retaliation. This system of collective defense has stabilized the world for 75 years. Thirty-two countries are now members, sharing intelligence, training, tactics, equipment, and agreements for use of airspace and bases. In 2024, NATO countries reaffirmed their commitment and said Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had “gravely undermined global security.”
And therein lies the rub. The post–World War II rules-based international order prevents authoritarians from grabbing land and resources that belong to other countries. But Russia’s president Vladimir Putin, for example, is eager to dismantle NATO and complete his grab of Ukraine’s eastern industrial regions.
Trump has taken the side of rising autocrats and taken aim at the rules-based international order with his insistence that the U.S. must control the Western Hemisphere. In service to that plan, he has propped up Argentina’s right-wing president Javier Milei and endorsed right-wing Honduran president Nasry Asfura, helping his election by pardoning former president Juan Orlando Hernández, a leading member of Asfura’s political party, who was serving 45 years in prison in the U.S. for drug trafficking. Trump ousted Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and seized control of much of Venezuela’s oil, the profits of which are going to an account in Qatar that Trump himself controls.
This week, Trump has launched a direct assault on the international order that has stabilized the world since 1945. He is trying to form his own “Board of Peace,” apparently to replace the United Nations. A draft charter for that institution gives Trump the presidency, the right to choose his successor, veto power over any actions, and control of the $1 billion fee permanent members are required to pay. In a letter to prospective members, Trump boasted that the Board of Peace is “the most impressive and consequential Board ever assembled,” and that “there has never been anything like it!” Those on it would, he said, “lead by example, and brilliantly invest in a secure and prosperous future for generations to come.”
The Kremlin says Putin, whose war on Ukraine has now lasted almost four years and who has been shunned from international organizations since his indictment by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, has received an invitation to that Board of Peace. So has Putin’s closest ally, President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, who Ivana Kottasová and Anna Chernova of CNN note has been called “Europe’s last dictator.” Also invited are Hungary’s prime minister and Putin ally Viktor Orbán as well as Javier Milei.
And now Trump is announcing to our allies that he has the right to seize another country.
Trump’s increasing frenzy is likely coming at least in part from increasing pressure over the fact the Department of Justice is now a full month past the date it was required by law to release all of the Epstein files. Another investigation will be in the news as well, as former special counsel Jack Smith testifies publicly later this week about Trump’s role in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Smith told the House Judiciary Committee in December that he believed a jury would have found Trump guilty on four felony counts related to his actions.
Smith knows what happened, and Trump knows that Smith knows what happened.
Trump’s fury over the Nobel Peace Prize last night was likely fueled as well by the national celebration today of an American who did receive that prize: the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. The Nobel Prize Committee awarded King the prize in 1964 for his nonviolent struggle for civil rights for the Black population in the U.S. He accepted it “with an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind,” affirming what now seems like a prescient rebuke to a president sixty years later, saying that “what self-centered men have torn down men other-centered can build up.”
Trump did not acknowledge Martin Luther King Jr. Day this year.
While the walls are clearly closing in on Trump’s ability to see beyond himself, he and his loyalists are being egged on in their demand for the seizure of Greenland by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who is publicly calling for a return to a might-makes-right world. On Sean Hannity’s show on the Fox News Channel today, Miller ignored the strength of NATO in maintaining global security as he insisted only the U.S. could protect Greenland.
He also ignored the crucial fact that the rules-based international order has been instrumental in increasing U.S.—as well as global—prosperity since 1945. With his claim that “American dollars, American treasure, American blood, American ingenuity is what keeps Europe safe and the free world safe,” Miller is erasing the genius of the generations before us. It is not the U.S. that has kept the world safe and kept standards of living rising: it is our alliances and the cooperation of the strongest nations in the world, working together, to prevent wannabe dictators from dividing the world among themselves.
Miller is not an elected official. Appointed by Trump and with a reasonable expectation that Trump will pardon him for any crimes he commits, Miller is insulated both from the rule of law and, crucially, from the will of voters. The Republican congress members Applebaum called on to stop Trump are not similarly insulated.
Tonight Danish troops—the same troops who stood shoulder to shoulder with U.S. troops in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021—arrived in Greenland to defend the island from the United States of America.
Notes:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/01/trump-letter-to-norway/685676/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/22/honduras-elections-leftist-party-libre
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/19/europe/putin-board-of-peace-gaza-trump-intl
https://www.icc-cpi.int/defendant/vladimir-vladimirovich-putin
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/1941/08/14/the-atlantic-charter
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/nato-history/a-short-history-of-nato
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1964/summary/
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1964/king/acceptance-speech/
https://eng.belta.by/president/view/trumps-letter-to-lukashenko-full-text-and-what-it-means-175942-2026/
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/us-catholic-cardinals-urge-trump-administration-embrace-moral-129346423
https://www.politico.eu/article/denmark-to-boost-military-presence-in-greenland/
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/1949/04/04/the-north-atlantic-treaty
https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/2024/07/10/washington-summit-declaration
https://fortune.com/2026/01/17/trump-nations-1-billion-membership-payment-peace-board-united-nations/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-17/trump-wants-nations-to-pay-1-billion-to-stay-on-his-peace-board
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/2025-12/Smith-Depo-Transcript_Redacted-w-Errata.pdf
X:
nickschifrin/status/2013107018081489006
faisalislam/status/2013143632522445099
faisalislam/status/2013177130536890877
Bluesky:
joycewhitevance.bsky.social/post/3mcs5zlstp224
ronfilipkowski.bsky.social/post/3mcslnjb2622n
gtconway.bsky.social/post/3mcsmygfb3c2k
vermontgmg.bsky.social/post/3mcsqlpp6ls2g
noelreports.com/post/3mcsndx5qcs2e
antongerashchenko.bsky.social/post/3mcse2pf5js2v
O aviário de Donald Trump - Jorio Dauster (Relatório Reservado)
O aviário de Donald Trump
- Relatório Reservado, 21/01/2026
- (Seqüência de “Uma pomba da paz sobrevoa o Planalto”)
Tomando conhecimento da minuta do estatuto do Conselho da Paz proposto por Donald Trump a cerca de 60 chefes de Estado, fica claro que a pomba mencionada em meu artigo anterior sobre o assunto ganha características de filhote de urubu.
São os seguintes os mais graves inconvenientes da referida Carta:
- ir além das questões relativas a Gaza nos termos da Resolução 2083 do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas ao estabelecer como sua missão, no Artigo 1, “promover a estabilidade, restaurar a governança confiável e legítima e assegurar a paz duradoura em áreas afetadas ou ameaçadas por conflitos”. Ora, tal amplitude de ação faria do Conselho um órgão tão ou mais importante quanto a ONU, criticada indiretamente no preâmbulo por sua falta de efetividade; e
- conceder poderes vastíssimos a Trump como presidente do Conselho, dentre os quais: escolher seus membros (artigo 2.1); renovar ou não a participação de qualquer membro após 3 anos caso ele não tenha contribuído com US$ 1 bilhão (2.2.c); criar, modificar e dissolver entidades subsidiárias (3.2.b); designar seu sucessor e só deixar de ser presidente por decisão voluntária ou voto unânime de incapacidade pelo Comitê Executivo cujos membros são de sua escolha (3.3); ter autoridade final com respeito ao significado, interpretação e aplicação do estatuto (7); adotar resoluções e diretivas em nome do Conselho (9); dissolver o Conselho quando achar necessário ou adequado (10.2).
Diante desses sérios defeitos do documento constitutivo do Conselho, como deve o Brasil reagir ao convite que Trump dirigiu a Lula para integrá-lo?
O primeiro ponto a considerar é que o Conselho de Paz mandatado pelas Nações Unidas efetivamente previa a presidência de Donald Trump sem entrar em detalhes sobre a estrutura e funcionamento do órgão. Sua finalidade, porém, era de fato impedir a continuidade do genocídio conduzido por Israel em Gaza e a anexação pura e simples da Faixa. Como as forças militares israelenses ainda controlam mais da metade daquele território e limitam fortemente os fluxos de assistência aos dois milhões de seres que ali sobrevivem em condições subumanas, não surpreende que Benjamin Netanyahu e seus comparsas da direita radical estejam furibundos com a iniciativa de Trump. Mais certo ainda, uma das milhares de mães palestinas que vive numa tenda e cuida de filhos sem comida suficiente, sem remédios, sem escolas e sem perspectivas não terá um minuto de sua triste existência para dedicar-se às questões geopolíticas em jogo ainda hoje. Nada impedirá que Israel alcance seus terríveis propósitos sem uma ação internacional eficaz.
Por tal motivo, e também pelos outros elementos de juízo que expus no artigo anterior sob o título de “Uma pomba sobrevoa o Palácio do Planalto”, não seria cabível uma negativa peremptória – coisa que até agora só foi feita pela França sem dúvida sob a influência do tratamento humilhante que Trump vem dando à Europa, ameaçando inclusive tomar a Groenlândia à força. Igualmente não caberia apressar-se com um sim sicofântico como tratou de fazer, por exemplo, o áulico Javier Milei. Na realidade, tal como já declarado pelo porta-voz do Kremlin. Putin e dezenas de chefes de Estado em todo o planeta estudam neste momento com seus chanceleres como responder a tão incômodo convite sem sacrificar o futuro dos palestinos em Gaza e sem provocar uma crise política com o vingativo ocupante da Casa Branca.
Durante esse período necessário de reflexão, os agentes diplomáticos devem estar realizando consultas urgentes a fim de tentar conhecer a posição de outros players importantes. Assim, por exemplo, o Brasil teria muito a ganhar caso esteja auscultando as opiniões de Canadá, Austrália, Reino Unido, Alemanha, Arábia Saudita, Egito e Emirados – para só citar algumas das nações que não reagirão de forma amadorística ao se verem confrontadas com situação tão desafiadora. Quem sabe pode até surgir uma resposta coletiva ou coordenada que evite a particularização aceita por Emmanuel Macron em troca de uma possível tarifa de 200% sobre os vinhos franceses nos Estados Unidos. Embora o artigo 12 diga que o estatuto não admite reservas, uma possibilidade consiste em que o Brasil aceite o convite, mas condicione sua entrada no Conselho à efetivação de determinadas alterações no texto plenamente explicadas. Caso tais mudanças sejam rechaçadas por Trump, isso faria com que nossa não participação se devesse a ele próprio.
Enquanto isso, as atenções devem continuar concentradas em buscar conhecer que outras criaturas habitam o estranho aviário de Donald Trump.
Presença deste modesto blogueiro nas bem traçadas linhas de Airton Dirceu Lemmertz, e no escrutínio de Madame IA
Je suis comblé, como diriam os franceses. Meu amigo Airton Dirceu Lemmertz me fait plaisir, chaque jour. Talvez ele vise algum presente de aniversário, ainda a ver nas minhas emendas orçamentárias. PRA
========
- Em ordem cronológica, as "participações" da Gemini (a IA do Google) no blogDiplomatizzando:
As frases mais polêmicas ditas por nossos líderes políticos: Lula, Bolsonaro, FHC, Dilma, Ciro Gomes - Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
A guerra de agressão da Rússia contra a Ucrânia, na semana de 12 a 18 de outubro de 2025, em resumo feito por Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
50 livros mais importantes na literatura mundial (IA, via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz):
Dúvidas provocadoras respondidas pela Inteligência Artificial - Paulo Roberto de Almeida, IA, Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Relatório da ONU sobre torturas perpetradas pela Rússia contra prisioneiros ucranianos - Informação da IA (via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz):
Economias abertas e fechadas: Prof. Celso Grisi, PRA e Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Putin está perdendo a guerra de agressão contra a Ucrânia- a IA tente poderar os argumentos de minha postagem:
A internacional dos poderes totalitários no mundo: declaração do presidente do Comitê do Noble da Paz (título PRA) - Transcrição e consulta à IA por Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Vergonha diplomática: governo Lula se recusa a condenar o sequestro de crianças ucranianas pelo amigo Putin:
O pequeno manual prática da decadência, examinado e reconsiderado pela Inteligência Artificial, por meio de Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Madame Inteligência Artificial me corrige mais uma vez, na minha postagem sobre a sorte do chanceler acidental - Airton Dirceu Lemmertz, Paulo Roberto de Almeida:
Quero ver Madame IA criticar a minha postagem, dos tempos do ser asqueroso que ocupava a presidência:
Madame IA ataca outra vez: ela comenta uma defesa que fiz da dignidade dos diplomatas, atingidos por um presidente indigno do cargo - Airton Dirceu Lemmertz, Paulo Roberto de Almeida:
24 pecados da vida política brasileira examinados por Madame IA - Paulo Roberto de Almeida e Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
O Brasil entre a segurança internacional e a sua própria segurança cidadã: resposta da IAGemini, via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Madame IA tenta defender a politica pró-russa do lulopetismo diplomático: ela está errada - Paulo Roberto de Almeida:
Madame IA se ocupa do pirata DJT no seu assalto a Caracas, via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Madame IA se posiciona contra minhas observações sobre as relações do governo atual do Brasil (não o Brasil) e a democracia (via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz):
Como fica a dívida da Venezuela para com o Brasil a partir de uma postagem de Vitelio Brustolin analisada por Madame IA, via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Madame IA se empenha, mais uma vez, em contestar minhas provocações, via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz - Paulo Roberto de Almeida:
Crítica às ideias de Christian Lynch sobre as ideologias políticas do brasileiro - Madame IA se ocupa de fazê-la, a pedido de Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
DJT anda em busca de um Prêmio Nobel da Paz, exige um, imediatamente, do Reino da Noruega - Oliver Stuenkel comenta, Madame IA se intromete:
===
- Em ordem cronológica, alguns vídeos do YouTube com links disponíveis no blog Diplomatizzando:
Paulo Roberto de Almeida: videoentrevistas constantes do YouTube (via Airton Diceu Lemmertz):
https://diplomatizzando.blogspot.com/2025/06/paulo-roberto-de-almeida.html
https://diplomatizzando.blogspot.com/2025/06/paulo-roberto-de-almeida.html
A Nação israelense: itinerário histórico - Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Israel: entre a tradição e as contradições do momento presente - via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz (Não É Imprensa):
Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:um mestre na transmissão de conhecimento.
Oleksandra Matviichuk, advogada ucraniana, vencedora do Prêmio Nobel da Paz em 2022 - Roda Viva (TV Cultura, SP):
Paulo Roberto de Almeida no YouTube, coletado por Airton Diceu Lemmertz:
Um debate relevante sobre soberania e truculência imperial - Professor HOC, videos YouTube, via Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
===
- PRA (Paulo Roberto de Almeida) ou o blog (Diplomatizzando) nas mídias digitais (redes sociais, blogs, sites, etc), em ordem cronológica:
Paulo Roberto de Almeida: videoentrevistas constantes do YouTube (via Airton Diceu Lemmertz):
Uma coleção de postagens deste meu blog selecionadas por Airton Dirceu Lemmertz:
Airton Dirceu Lemmertz: um atento seguidor deste blog Diplomatizzando:
Algumas das minhas melhores postagens no Diplomatizzando, por Airton Dirceu Lemmertz - Paulo Roberto de Almeida:
Paulo Roberto de Almeida: presença física, virtual, digital nos instrumentos de busca, por Airton Dirceu. Lemmertz:
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)
Postagem em destaque
Livro Marxismo e Socialismo finalmente disponível - Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Meu mais recente livro – que não tem nada a ver com o governo atual ou com sua diplomacia esquizofrênica, já vou logo avisando – ficou final...
-
Personagens Bíblicos / História do Profeta Samuel: Quem foi Samuel na Bíblia? https://estiloadoracao.com/historia-do-profeta-samuel/ Histó...
-
As principais ideologias políticas do brasileiro, segundo Christian Christian Edward Cyril Lynch , em matério do Meio (Pedro Doria): "O...
-
A EXTREMA-DIREITA ESTÁ GOVERNANDO QUANTOS REGIMES DITATORIAIS NO MUNDO DE HOJE? Augusto de Franco, 10/08/2024 Vamos pegar cerca de 40 regime...
-
Lecturas al cerrar el dia... "En resolución, él [el ingenioso Hidalgo de la Mancha] se enfrascó tanto en su lectura, que le pasaban las... -
Roman Sheremeta explain how Putin lies about the Russian people in Donbas. It is a lie that “russian-speaking” Ukrainians want to be a part ...
-
Pesquisadores contestam veracidade de relíquias judaicas ocultas em casarão dos Buenos na Cidade de Goiás. É fake news Redação Jornal Opção...
-
O mundo "sem regras" de Celso Amorim Um manifesto da hipocrisia diplomática THIAGO PADOVAN Revista ID, JAN 23 ∙ POST COMO CONV...
-
Qual é o apoio real da população americano às políticas de Trump? Uma questão relevante. Nota preliminar PRA: Recebo o texto abaixo em seg...
-
Um exchange entre amigos sobre questões de atualidade Na semana passada, expressei, num exchange entre amigos, opiniões muito fortes contra ...
