The world has to stop being cowards to Trump, and collectively stand to destroy him.
195
[deleted]17 hr ago
+45
[deleted]
45
rookie-mistake15 hr ago
+23
I mean, he has demonstrated that he will actively engage in the most insane actions to avenge perceived wrongs, regardless of the self-inflicted damage to his supporters, his country, or his allies - and the US has demonstrated that they will do nothing to stop him.
Given they're theoretically hamstringing his current rampage with the midterms this fall, I can unfortunately completely understand trying to avoid provoking him into actions whose consequences will far outlast his reign, especially on something as globally impactful as climate change.
Admittedly, that's an optimistic interpretation, but I don't think it's wholly unrealistic.
23
SirTainLee16 hr ago
+3
You mean 30% Trump? He has very little support in the US, now. Why fear him?
3
rookie-mistake15 hr ago
+18
because power and control are only proportional to the government's popularity in democracies.
I mean, honestly, "why fear provoking the mad despot of arguably the most powerful country in the world?" is a question that answers itself, isn't it? There haven't really been any checks or balances demonstrated in his current reign, nor has there been any degree of restraint with regards to decisions that will have consequences that last far longer than his tenure in office.
18
BendicantMias13 hr ago
+5
He still has TWICE the approval ratings of his counterparts in France and Germany, Macron and Merz. They're literally HALF as popular.
5
Meenmachin39 hr ago
+2
Only 15%(or less) approve of Macron and Merz?
2
BendicantMias9 hr ago
+2
>German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has the lowest approval rating among 24 democratically elected world leaders, with just 19% of Germans saying they are satisfied with his work
>French President Emmanuel Macron ranked second-lowest, with 18% approval and 75% disapproval, in the survey, which tracks leaders' popularity across major democracies.
>US President Donald Trump ranked just ahead of Erdoğan in 10th place from the bottom, despite launching military operations in Iran. Some 38% of Americans said they were satisfied with his work, while 57% were dissatisfied.
>A survey by The Economist produced similar figures, with 37% satisfied and 56% dissatisfied.
[https://www.euronews.com/2026/04/13/german-chancellor-merz-the-most-unpopular-head-of-government-in-the-world-survey-shows](https://www.euronews.com/2026/04/13/german-chancellor-merz-the-most-unpopular-head-of-government-in-the-world-survey-shows)
2
evilparagon13 hr ago
+15
Eh, it’s not really cowardice, just trying to get productive discussion done. The G7 isn’t going to be productive if the US is being obstructive over climate change when other things could be discussed instead.
It’s like when a toddler gets bored as f*** when parents talk about work so they start crying and disrupt the conversation because they want to be involved. Way better for the parents to just wait until the toddler goes for their nap.
15
BendicantMias13 hr ago
+9
And that's how you get spoiled kids, turning into spoiled adults.
9
ddz15078 hr ago
+1
Agreed.
1
JacquoRock21 hr ago
+117
They really should not consider the US in this. Really.
117
RaymondBeaumont20 hr ago
+26
Let's not talk about the single most important issue of the day because the pedophiles might get upset.
26
abbzug21 hr ago
+24
Ain't nobody got time to listen to grandpa ramble on about windmills. It's not like they can't talk to each other outside of the G7.
24
BendicantMias21 hr ago
+35
>France wound up a meeting of G7 environment ministers on Friday defending its "pragmatic" decision to keep climate change off the agenda to avoid a clash with the U.S.
>U.S. President Donald Trump has dismissed climate change as a hoax despite scientific evidence, and has withdrawn his country from several international climate bodies.
>Keeping it off the formal agenda of the Paris-hosted meeting was "a more pragmatic approach" that avoided "the risk of certain partners walking from the negotiating table," French Environment Minister Monique Barbut told reporters.
35
maybelying19 hr ago
+42
WTF are environment ministers meeting to discuss, if not climate change?
If they called The economic ministers together to discuss the state of the global economy, would they keep tariffs and oil out of the discussion, too?
42
BendicantMias18 hr ago
+17
>If they called The economic ministers together to discuss the state of the global economy, would they keep tariffs and oil out of the discussion, too?
Probably..
17
No_Method598920 hr ago
+12
It doesnt matter lol. he will rant about windmill regardless. He's like the hulk, but instead of getting stronger, he gets more stupid. Let just hope we don't get world breaker trump.
12
Yuukiko_21 hr ago
+25
Is there really any difference when the US won't listen? Just make the G6 and go at it on our own
25
DifferentSquirrel55121 hr ago
+20
My favorite part of the US hiding climate change is the farmers they're forever screwing over by doing it while slapping bumper stickers on their mobile oil rigs with the slogan "No Farmers No Food" like lol wtf you think we were warning you for dumb-dumb? Enjoy your synthetic vegetables future generations.
20
silicondali19 hr ago
-10
Buddy, there's a war going on and everyone and their dog has been talking about how fertilizer, a petrochemical, is being directly affected.
Your favourite part is apparently you fellating yourself over your own distinctive brand of ignorance.
-10
DifferentSquirrel55118 hr ago
+1
I do enjoy felating myself...
1
Independent_Rip_65521 hr ago
+11
Ah great, keep pandering to the pedophile rapist. I’m sure that will work.
11
chesterforbes19 hr ago
+5
Gotta stop just trying to appease the US. Just cuz they’re trying to ruin everything for everyone doesn’t mean we have to let them
5
TJ-LEED-AP21 hr ago
+16
Pusssies
16
leisurechef20 hr ago
+6
Piss weak
6
BrofessorFarnsworth20 hr ago
+8
I'll accept this omission on the condition that they replace it with a review of the Epstein files
8
pingveno18 hr ago
+3
Probably not a bad idea. They can have productive conversations at COP26, where crazy grandpa isn't going to go anyway. Or, really, a lot of other places. The US will just meddle if people try to get global warming related work done at the G7 summit.
3
weavebot21 hr ago
+8
Didn't it used to be the G8?
Edit: I'll spell it out for the Americans. Russia was ejected for their aggression in Crimea, something that should be considered going forward in light of the current mess, you know the one.
8
No-Zombie602521 hr ago
+3
In a way it kinda still is, funny how current US policies have helped Russia and Putin. It's almost like Putin has a complete and unredacted set of the Epstein files along with a lot of other substantial dirt on the man they very much wanted to get elected and actively helped to win.
3
RezzleG21 hr ago
+10
Russia got booted out back in 2014 mate, you're a little bit behind the times on that one!
10
weavebot21 hr ago
+4
Yeah I know, point is, why
4
John_Mark_Corpuz_221 hr ago
+1
From a quick search, it's Russia and they got removed from the G summit in 2014. It's very clear that the reason for that is the annexation of Crimea.
1
BendicantMias20 hr ago
+13
He knows that. His point is seemingly that the US hasn't been, despite having attacked several nations itself and generally causing a much bigger global mess. In his words, "The question itself was intended to illustrate a point by drawing a parallel" - so basically he's pointing out the double standards.
13
RezzleG21 hr ago
-5
It would take you all of 30 seconds to find out yourself, but the annexation of Crimea probably had something to do with it
-5
weavebot21 hr ago
+11
The question itself was intended to illustrate a point by drawing a parallel
11
BendicantMias21 hr ago
-2
Bruh if you want to draw a parallel between the treatment of Russia versus how the US gets away with everything, be my guest. But at least have the decency to say it plainly instead of trying to be deliberately obtuse. It just makes you seem cocky.
-2
weavebot21 hr ago
+2
I edited the comment for you
2
RezzleG21 hr ago
-3
Parallel to what? The US or any other G7 country for that matter haven't annexed any sovereign territory recently, to my knowledge
-3
weavebot21 hr ago
+6
You can't infer that the current unjustified aggression is enough of a parallel?
6
RezzleG21 hr ago
-4
Not really. There's unjustified aggression, and then there's annexing sovereign territory. That's like comparing a shandy to an Imperial Stout
-4
BendicantMias20 hr ago
+5
The US' aggression is also horrible. Don't try minimizing the deaths of over 4.5 MILLION people just in this century bro - [https://costsofwar.watson.brown.edu/costs/human](https://costsofwar.watson.brown.edu/costs/human)
5
RezzleG20 hr ago
-1
Over 90% of those deaths you linked come from retaliation following 9/11, how is that 'horrible US agression'?
-1
BendicantMias21 hr ago
+1
Pretty sure his point is that they've attacked multiple nations, and suffered no consequences for it. Though he really should have spelled that out instead of trying to be cocky about it.
1
RezzleG21 hr ago
Yeah I get that, but comparing the kidnapping of the piece of shit Maduro and the attack of the #1 state sponsored terrorist country and one of the most oppressive regimes in the world is hardly the same as annexing a sovereign state just because you can.
0
BendicantMias20 hr ago
Your opinion of the states in question is irrelevant - the US' acts are still illegal and have caused huge global disruption. It's also not new - the US holds the record for most wars since WW2. And the death toll from its wars even just since the turn of this century is horrifying - [https://costsofwar.watson.brown.edu/costs/human](https://costsofwar.watson.brown.edu/costs/human)
Don't try minimizing the deaths of over 4.5 MILLION people bro..
0
RezzleG20 hr ago
You're telling me the US retaliation post 9/11 was illegal?
0
noir_lord21 hr ago
-1
Russia got yeeted in 2014.
-1
BendicantMias21 hr ago
+5
His point is seemingly that the US hasn't been, despite having attacked several nations itself and generally causing a much bigger global mess. In his words, "The question itself was intended to illustrate a point by drawing a parallel" - so basically he's pointing out the double standards.
5
Starter-for-Ten11 hr ago
+5
Cowards.
Appeasing the bully again. One man Vs the future of the planet. The G7 and France is complicit in this fuckary.
5
DaySecure764220 hr ago
+2
We probably will get caught in AI and/or nuclear wars first before our mother earth has the chance to end us.
2
isthereadrwho19 hr ago
+2
I'm sorry but they're correct. They can do climate change without us, we're not really in the climate change business right now. It's a waste of time talking to us
2
BendicantMias18 hr ago
+2
The US was still there. The result was just that they didn't talk about climate change at all, even with each other. It was removed from the agenda.
2
Falconflyer7518 hr ago
+2
Like the US wouldn’t just invent a reason to clash anyways
2
tonytsunami16 hr ago
+2
It's really not up to them. It's up n to us Americans
2
TheHomersapien20 hr ago
+3
Appeasement has worked out so well for France, historically. Great move.
3
deleteduu19 hr ago
+2
When master tells subordinate obey that's all. When did world grow spineless
2
sparkax17 hr ago
+2
Make it the G6 and it can be right back on the top!! Maybe let China, Brazil, India or South Africa in as new members to replace the US and Russia???
2
reesly13 hr ago
+2
Weak. As. Piss.
2
MikeSteamer21 hr ago
+1
Good thing we’re all on the same side!
1
vRedDeathv19 hr ago
+1
It's ok, after all we're not on the same boat/s
1
Mistrblank15 hr ago
+1
Call him on his shit and laugh at him like the child he is.
66 Comments