I cannot emphasize enough how understated I am being when I say this: I expect our president to be capable of accurately assessing the consequences of military engagement with foreign nations, and if he is so easily "duped" he is unfit to continue in the position.
Perhaps he should be spending less time lining his own pockets with crypto scams, pump and dump schemes, insider trading, and paid access to his tweets. There was no shortage of advisors who could have warned him that this was an asinine plan.
He really doesn't want to think about it anymore, but I'm sure he's not thought through the potential for the Epstein-Trump files to become a story again in the media without the Iran war to preoccupy the pundits
When Trump attacked, he confirmed right off the bat that his attention span was not going to last half this long.
In his own words, so I guess you would have to take them at face value whether that was zero or some other number. More likely negative numbers like during the business ventures that made him well-known to begin with.
You can make too much of this. Countries regularly have different names for foreign or shared places. The "English Channel" is "La Manche", Cologne is Köln. Like the English language, it's pretty much down to "that's what I call it". If people continue to call it "Lake Ontario" that's what it will be.
It's a country's leader petulantly ordering their entire country to call a lake by a new name that wrongly implies it belongs to them, which it doesn't, in order to spite their main trading partner because they rejected a trade deal that would massively harm them.
Going through those, it looks as if only about 50% stuck, mostly from World War II, so here's hoping. I'm not sure if using the name is in any way enforced?
That is not the point. Are you trying to minimize the phenomenon and cause and root? The point is, the actions taken by the appointed, what they reveal, the reactions from other parts, what they reveal, what will come next.
The disagreeing part better formulate an argument.
Close. But it's not (re)named Lake Americas. Remember, there are two continents, North America and South America. It's not one continent; however, jointly they can be called The Americas.
Sure, and referring to the whole of the UK as England is also a thing. It’s confusing but people are people. Or as they say in some parts of “England” it’s queer as folk.
If you follow the link there are dictionary entries. It's not stupidity, it's completely reasonable. Amerigo Vespucci didn't name the USA, he named the entire continent.
"Britain" is widely used to refer to the UK, but Great Britain is the physical land mass which excludes Northern Ireland, so there is rarely confusion.
