|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Trump never claimed anything needed to be fixed or that he would fix it re: Brexit, though, in his remarks while in Scotland. Scots are against Brexit so somehow this meant anyone claiming it would be good for them (like Trump) is wrong. Well that's just the argumentum ad populum fallacy, Trump's opinion could be right and the opinion of the majority of Scots could be wrong. Trump's opinion and Scots' opinions aren't enough on their own to determine that.
Obama's foreign policy is not looked at kindly by most of the world, all the global goodwill he got simply by not being George W. Bush vanished years ago. He is a frustrating man to non-US governments in many of the same ways Bush was, but on different issues. And sometimes he is frustrating to them in exactly the same way on exactly the same issues. He super-pissed off Russia by going along with France and Britain to bomb Libya, then he super-pissed off France and Britain by basically saying they're the ones to blame for Libya being a fragmented warlord-run country now (something Bush never would have done by the way, talk about allies the way Obama has again and again. Bush left that to underlings like Rumsfeld). He super-pissed off Britain again by talking about how they'd go to the back of the queue on trade if they voted Brexit. He's super-pissed off Israel basically 24/7. He super-pissed off Egypt's current government by backing the Muslim Brotherhood until it became clear he had no choice but to accept that the military had overthrown Morsi and wasn't going to give up power any time soon. His deal with Iran is a joke, Iran's nuclear program is not dismantled and it has laughed in America's face with its continued missile testing which it was supposed to stop as part of the agreement. The career diplomats of Western Europe who should be his natural constituency don't really like him that much for whatever reasons.
Eastern Europe has continued to get more powder-keggy during his administration which started when Bush was president but Obama hasn't made things any calmer there, unless Russia invading Ukraine and playing chicken in the Baltics = calmer. The Russian reset was a reset straight back to 1956.
He did open up relations with Cuba (which is nice but basically means fuck-all globally).
He has gathered the nations of southeast Asia firmly under America's wing. But really they would have run to America regardless of who the president is because China keeps throwing her weight around and they have nowhere else to turn but the US.
He greatly expanded drone strikes which was good policy but most of the rest of the world doesn't like it so it's another Obama mixed bag.
|
On July 18 2016 03:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
Force Mexico to pay for it: This is just classic imperialism, and I love it. Take a weaker neighbor and publicly bend them to your will. It has the obvious benefit of us not spending a dime on the wall, but it also has the added benefit of sending shock-waves through the geopolitical world, sending a clearer message of American exceptionalism than anything since the Iraq War (the military side of it, not the diplomatic crap that came after). This is genius.
thank you, i thought from all your posts you were actually serious, but thank you for jumping the shark now, and showing us that you were just trolling all along... very funny 
|
On July 18 2016 04:02 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 03:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
Force Mexico to pay for it: This is just classic imperialism, and I love it. Take a weaker neighbor and publicly bend them to your will. It has the obvious benefit of us not spending a dime on the wall, but it also has the added benefit of sending shock-waves through the geopolitical world, sending a clearer message of American exceptionalism than anything since the Iraq War (the military side of it, not the diplomatic crap that came after). This is genius.
thank you, i thought from all your posts you were actually serious, but thank you for jumping the shark now, and showing us that you were just trolling all along... very funny
The West was built on Imperialism. China still practices imperialism. The Muslim world practices imperialism. Russia is practicing imperialism.
The only people who don't practice it anymore are Europe and North America. It is silly. It's based on a flawed understanding of the world and a Utopian ideal which is quickly unraveling before our eyes. Nations have to expand and conquer, or they will wither and die. Some nations with geographic/political irrelevance or natural super-barriers can escape this binary choice. Massive, global nations do not have that third option of neutrality.
Anyway, I don't see how someone can so confidently dismiss ten thousand years of civilized history, which was written in the blood of conquerer and conquered, and pretend like global war and conquest are over, based on 30 years of post-Cold War peace which was guaranteed by an American military/diplomatic dominance which simply does not exist anymore.
|
On July 18 2016 04:02 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 03:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
Force Mexico to pay for it: This is just classic imperialism, and I love it. Take a weaker neighbor and publicly bend them to your will. It has the obvious benefit of us not spending a dime on the wall, but it also has the added benefit of sending shock-waves through the geopolitical world, sending a clearer message of American exceptionalism than anything since the Iraq War (the military side of it, not the diplomatic crap that came after). This is genius.
thank you, i thought from all your posts you were actually serious, but thank you for jumping the shark now, and showing us that you were just trolling all along... very funny
Name's program. Especially the latter part of it.
|
Police say they are looking for a member of a sovereign citizen movement in relation to Baton Rouge shooting.
|
On July 18 2016 04:10 Cowboy24 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 04:02 puerk wrote:On July 18 2016 03:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
Force Mexico to pay for it: This is just classic imperialism, and I love it. Take a weaker neighbor and publicly bend them to your will. It has the obvious benefit of us not spending a dime on the wall, but it also has the added benefit of sending shock-waves through the geopolitical world, sending a clearer message of American exceptionalism than anything since the Iraq War (the military side of it, not the diplomatic crap that came after). This is genius.
thank you, i thought from all your posts you were actually serious, but thank you for jumping the shark now, and showing us that you were just trolling all along... very funny The West was built on Imperialism. China still practices imperialism. The Muslim world practices imperialism. Russia is practicing imperialism. The only people who don't practice it anymore are Europe and North America. It is silly. It's based on a flawed understanding of the world and a Utopian ideal which is quickly unraveling before our eyes. Nations have to expand and conquer, or they will wither and die. Some nations with geographic/political irrelevance or natural super-barriers can escape this binary choice. Massive, global nations do not have that third option of neutrality. Anyway, I don't see how someone can so confidently dismiss ten thousand years of civilized history, which was written in the blood of conquerer and conquered, and pretend like global war and conquest are over, based on 30 years of post-Cold War peace which was guaranteed by an American military/diplomatic dominance which simply does not exist anymore.
Clearly getting Mexico to pay for a wall constitutes "expanding and conquering" with the same benefit as past wars involving "the blood of conquerer and conquered". And clearly we need to conquer Mexico (in the form of building a wall between our countries) or else we will wither and die. And clearly, Mexico will pay for the wall after Trump threatens to intercept remittances coming through Western Union. At the same time as he deports the Mexicans sending remittances.
Such logic and reasoning. Let us all admire Donald Trump Logic and ReasoningTM.
|
Conquer and annex Mexico.
Then build giant wall to block your new colony.
The American way.
|
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/17/politics/cleveland-police-baton-rouge-security-open-carry/index.html?
The head of Cleveland's largest police union is calling on Ohio Gov. John Kasich to temporarily restrict the state's open carry gun laws during this week's Republican National Convention following Sunday's shooting in Louisiana that killed three officers and wounded at least three others.
Kasich, responding to the request, said: "Ohio governors do not have the power to arbitrarily suspend federal and state constitutional rights or state laws as suggested."
"The bonds between our communities and police must be reset and rebuilt -- as we're doing in Ohio -- so our communities and officers can both be safe. Everyone has an important role to play in that renewal," he said.
Gonna be an interesting convention...
|
My buddy who lives in Cleveland airbnb'd his place for 2700 dollars and is getting the hell out of town, seems like a common story.
|
The GOP wants everyone to have guns. Just not around them apparently.
|
On July 18 2016 05:06 Plansix wrote:
The GOP wants everyone to have guns. Just not around them apparently.
I wonder how they think the protesters should protect themselves against a potential terrorist attack?
|
On July 18 2016 04:46 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Conquer and annex Mexico.
Then build giant wall to block your new colony.
The American way.
The Wall is already built on the southern Mexican border.
To be fair it would be the best for both parties. Mexico has structural weakness's that would be solved right quick with some FBI involvement and free movement for the seasonal harvests in southern united states. Mexico gets to be in the drivers seat of the petro dollar and the united states gets another huge boost to its margins on oil production and food production.
And we all get one step closer to the global government we all want.
|
On July 18 2016 05:12 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 04:46 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Conquer and annex Mexico.
Then build giant wall to block your new colony.
The American way. The Wall is already built on the southern Mexican border. To be fair it would be the best for both parties. Mexico has structural weakness's that would be solved right quick with some FBI involvement and free movement for the seasonal harvests in southern united states. Mexico gets to be in the drivers seat of the petro dollar and the united states gets another huge boost to its margins on oil production and food production. And we all get one step closer to the global government we all want.
Maybe for the global capitalist class and impoverished Mexicans.. other people, no. But hey, efficiency, right?
|
On July 18 2016 02:33 Shield wrote:
Does Obama have any international success other than killing Osama bin Laden? Clearly, he isn't doing enough against Russia, ISIS, etc. He seems weak there.
Iran nuclear deal, ending the embargo on Cuba, and the strategic pivot towards East Asia (renewal of US-Vietnam relations) etc., but I've personally been critical of his unwillingness to intervene and to lead.
+ Show Spoiler +
The roles are ironically reversed here.
|
On July 18 2016 05:38 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 02:33 Shield wrote:
Does Obama have any international success other than killing Osama bin Laden? Clearly, he isn't doing enough against Russia, ISIS, etc. He seems weak there. Iran nuclear deal, ending the embargo on Cuba, and the strategic pivot towards East Asia (renewal of US-Vietnam relations) etc., but I've personally been critical of his unwillingness to intervene and to lead. + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSD1d-6P6qI The roles are ironically reversed here.
The so-called pivot to asia really was a goal more-so than a reality with the way the TPP is currently dead in the water and the reoccurring problems in the middle-east and, to an extent, europe.
|
The tpp is dead in the water? I'm a bit surprised given how everyone seems to treat it as an inevitable satan in the flesh that I talk to
|
On July 18 2016 05:43 Livelovedie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 05:38 Lord Tolkien wrote:On July 18 2016 02:33 Shield wrote:
Does Obama have any international success other than killing Osama bin Laden? Clearly, he isn't doing enough against Russia, ISIS, etc. He seems weak there. Iran nuclear deal, ending the embargo on Cuba, and the strategic pivot towards East Asia (renewal of US-Vietnam relations) etc., but I've personally been critical of his unwillingness to intervene and to lead. + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSD1d-6P6qI The roles are ironically reversed here. The so-called pivot to asia really was a goal more-so than a reality with the way the TPP is currently dead in the water and the reoccurring problems in the middle-east and, to an extent, europe.
TPP is stalled for now, unfortunately, but probably for not much longer after the election cycle, depending on how much re-negotiations take (as Clinton has expressed a desire to change several provisions).
And, be that as it may, Obama has made great strides to resurrect old working relationships with allies in the Pacific which, previously, were mostly dead and formal only, and our position there has significantly improved in almost every sense. Now arguably this would still have happened with a McCain presidency and is driven as much by Chinese action as by US policy, so I can't say it was an unprecedented and unique accomplishment.
|
On July 18 2016 04:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
Police say they are looking for a member of a sovereign citizen movement in relation to Baton Rouge shooting.
Lol where did you read that? The shooter is a black male.
|
On July 18 2016 04:41 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 04:10 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 18 2016 04:02 puerk wrote:On July 18 2016 03:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
Force Mexico to pay for it: This is just classic imperialism, and I love it. Take a weaker neighbor and publicly bend them to your will. It has the obvious benefit of us not spending a dime on the wall, but it also has the added benefit of sending shock-waves through the geopolitical world, sending a clearer message of American exceptionalism than anything since the Iraq War (the military side of it, not the diplomatic crap that came after). This is genius.
thank you, i thought from all your posts you were actually serious, but thank you for jumping the shark now, and showing us that you were just trolling all along... very funny The West was built on Imperialism. China still practices imperialism. The Muslim world practices imperialism. Russia is practicing imperialism. The only people who don't practice it anymore are Europe and North America. It is silly. It's based on a flawed understanding of the world and a Utopian ideal which is quickly unraveling before our eyes. Nations have to expand and conquer, or they will wither and die. Some nations with geographic/political irrelevance or natural super-barriers can escape this binary choice. Massive, global nations do not have that third option of neutrality. Anyway, I don't see how someone can so confidently dismiss ten thousand years of civilized history, which was written in the blood of conquerer and conquered, and pretend like global war and conquest are over, based on 30 years of post-Cold War peace which was guaranteed by an American military/diplomatic dominance which simply does not exist anymore. Clearly getting Mexico to pay for a wall constitutes "expanding and conquering" with the same benefit as past wars involving "the blood of conquerer and conquered". And clearly we need to conquer Mexico (in the form of building a wall between our countries) or else we will wither and die. And clearly, Mexico will pay for the wall after Trump threatens to intercept remittances coming through Western Union. At the same time as he deports the Mexicans sending remittances. Such logic and reasoning. Let us all admire Donald Trump Logic and ReasoningTM.
Didn't really claim any of that.
I said it would be an example of America using it's economic strength to bend a neighboring country to it's will, sending a loud and clear diplomatic message without requiring a single shot to be fired.
Mass deportations have already been ruled out by both parties, and even Trump has backed off the idea.
|
On July 18 2016 06:33 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2016 04:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
Police say they are looking for a member of a sovereign citizen movement in relation to Baton Rouge shooting.
Lol where did you read that? The shooter is a black male.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
