Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Actual high-stakes negotiations directly between leaders are rare (not non-existent mind you, but rare). Which is part of why the former President's efforts to leverage his supposed brilliant one-on-one negotiation flopped so hard. The business simply isn't done that way.
That said, I'd much rather have a leader who recognizes their limits in times of extreme stress and maintains their mental health than the normal authoritarian model where the unstable leader has repeated mental breakdowns which are then converted into policy by their underlings.
Like, Eisenhower kept a regular sleep schedule, played bridge & badminton, took up (& abandoned) sketching to cope w/ the anxiety for D-Day. He slept through the first hours. Hitler stayed up late, took drugs & gave orders to imaginary units. Guess who won?
(Hitler of course also slept through the first few hours of D-Day). Every time I see these folks arguing that 'we need Many Men' to win whatever, they are invariably advocating self-defeating toxic BS rather than actual leadership.
Sigh at twitter's lack of an edit button, that should read, 'we need Manly Men' but I think you all get my point. Men are actually necessary for society. Machismo is not.
Plus, the marathon negotiations into the wee hours of the morning mean these "mentally strong" leaders make consistently worse decisions because of lack of sleep. I think there’s even some studies on this but can’t provide a source sadly 
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
