EPTAs for going to war, maybe that's Trumps way of "creating" jobs - because he's definitely cutting back a lot of the spending the US has been doing outside of the country.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6637
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
As for going to war, maybe that's Trumps way of "creating" jobs - because he's definitely cutting back a lot of the spending the US has been doing outside of the country. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On January 25 2017 00:56 Mohdoo wrote: I would not give a flying fuck, as a generally anti-war American. Chinese dominance, no matter how you look at it, needs to be prevented from an American global power perspective. If Trump makes a fight out of the area, and goes way overboard such that China knows it would be madness to make a big deal out of, suddenly the US is big dog of the area. It's not a hard sell for China to paint trump as a narcissist who wants to control absolutely everything--possibly the world. Especially if they show videos of American ships attacking fishing boats. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18834 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18088 Posts
On January 25 2017 00:34 Doodsmack wrote: Maybe I was wrong, and it's just a complete dupe job by Trump against his voters. There's something wrong with that graph, though. There's spikes exactly every 10 years since 1960. Clearly something funky happening with the data set, so not quite sure how much stock I put in the data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On January 25 2017 01:28 Acrofales wrote: There's something wrong with that graph, though. There's spikes exactly every 10 years since 1960. Clearly something funky happening with the data set, so not quite sure how much stock I put in the data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Census. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18834 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21871 Posts
Vox had one with total numbers and they blame the Census for the spike aswell ![[image loading]](https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/3W__tCV6dMl6TRgJVEecFX1J44k=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7858375/chart2.png) Source | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On January 25 2017 01:02 Mohdoo wrote: China is doing well at doing exactly what they are doing, but they are clearly walking a very tight rope in many respects. While I do not claim to be a military expert, my understanding of China's military leads me to believe that is is mostly hollow at this point when it comes to actual conflict. I definitely think China would blink first. I'll link this as a pretty well-considered discussion of where China's military is and isn't up to par. Long story short: if I had to bet one way or the other, I would indeed bet that China would blink first. But I'm not sure I would bet on it given that we do have a choice. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18088 Posts
On January 25 2017 00:56 Mohdoo wrote: I would not give a flying fuck, as a generally anti-war American. Chinese dominance, no matter how you look at it, needs to be prevented from an American global power perspective. If Trump makes a fight out of the area, and goes way overboard such that China knows it would be madness to make a big deal out of, suddenly the US is big dog of the area. Clearly anti-America propaganda is not so much aimed at America, but rather at everybody who doesn't have an axe to grind. Clearly Indonesia, Japan, India and other interested nations without a direct claim to the area will not take kindly to American adventurism. For starters, what is America doing in the South China Sea? Nominally protecting the rights of Vietnam, Phillipines, etc. who cannot make a fist against China, but clearly gunning down fishing boats is not something that the American navy should be doing in the South China Sea. And at the end of the day, you have your navy in the South China Sea. Any potshot the Chinese can take from far nearer to home than you are, is a victory against the imperialist oppressors who are far from home occupying a sea that has nothing to do with them. I honestly don't see how a naval war near China can go well. Sure, you can dominate them at sea, but what good does it do? Expends huge amounts of money, generates vast amounts of negative publicity and gets you absolutely nowhere strategically. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 25 2017 01:41 Acrofales wrote: Clearly anti-America propaganda is not so much aimed at America, but rather at everybody who doesn't have an axe to grind. Clearly Indonesia, Japan, India and other interested nations without a direct claim to the area will not take kindly to American adventurism. For starters, what is America doing in the South China Sea? Nominally protecting the rights of Vietnam, Phillipines, etc. who cannot make a fist against China, but clearly gunning down fishing boats is not something that the American navy should be doing in the South China Sea. And at the end of the day, you have your navy in the South China Sea. Any potshot the Chinese can take from far nearer to home than you are, is a victory against the imperialist oppressors who are far from home occupying a sea that has nothing to do with them. I honestly don't see how a naval war near China can go well. Sure, you can dominate them at sea, but what good does it do? Expends huge amounts of money, generates vast amounts of negative publicity and gets you absolutely nowhere strategically. It really depends though, you're saying this as if you know for sure India, Indonesia and Japan don't want us there. In my opinion, they do want us there because of how aggressive China has become claiming waters that clearly isn't their right to claim. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
The official President of the United States (POTUS) Twitter page was updated on Sunday to confirm the messages are being posted by Dan Scavino, Mr Trump’s “assistant” and Director of Social Media. Mr Scavino has used his own Twitter page to publish a number of untrue posts, including one of a video he said showed Syrian refugees in Germany holding a rally in support of Isis. The event was actually a protest against a German far-right group. He has also repeatedly shared content from conspiracy theory websites and fake news organisations, including InfoWars. ... Mr Scavino...posted an image of Hillary Clinton that included a Star of David and the words “most corrupt candidate ever”. The image had originated on a neo-Nazi website. ... During the Republican primary, Mr Scavino shared a video that claimed Mr Trump’s then rival, Ted Cruz, had had an affair with his former employee, the CNN commentator Amanda Carpenter. ... Mr Scavino first met Mr Trump in 1990, when he was 16 and working as a caddy at a golf club in New York. Mr Trump reportedly told him “You’ll work for me one day”. ... The 40-year-old is considered to be fiercely loyal to his long-term boss. Asked by CNN last year whether there was “anything [Mr Trump] could say or do that would lead you to abandon him”, he replied: “No”. Source | ||
|
Blitzkrieg0
United States13132 Posts
On January 25 2017 01:30 farvacola wrote: The Federal Reserve Banks oftentimes lack insight, but their data tends to be pretty solid. The data can be correct, but the presentation choice is certainly misleading. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
Interestingly Australia has said they're open to possibly replace the US in the TPP with China and Indonesia. It would be hilarious if China emerges as the new free trade champion in a decade or two. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jan/24/australia-open-to-china-and-indonesia-joining-tpp-after-us-pulls-out | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
Obamacare repeal seems to me like a minefield. Republicans don't want to stand up to the headlines of people losing coverage. Their hands are tied. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On January 25 2017 02:28 Nyxisto wrote: I think the war discussions are very hypothetical. If anything China is going to increase influence through economic means rather than brute force, as they have done over the last few years. Interestingly Australia has said they're open to possibly replace the US in the TPP with China and Indonesia. It would be hilarious if China emerges as the new free trade champion in a decade or two. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jan/24/australia-open-to-china-and-indonesia-joining-tpp-after-us-pulls-out China WILL NOT go to war with the US in the topic of the islands. It has ZERO to gain for the losses needed to win (which they won't) China, if forced, WILL use those islands as a staging ground. Its much much easier for China to force America's hand. They have more fishermen and more resources than the neighboring countries do, they can just start using the islands for fishing and force the US to strike first. It will not take much to show the world that Trump is a loose cannon that can't be trusted. People already are in that mindset. And it won't take much to slowly push the message towards a union against the United States. Make tariffs against the US, cut off US production, and unify against Trump--in a Chinese attempt to restore order in the US. They don't need to fire a damn shot to win those islands and the world. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On January 25 2017 02:33 Thieving Magpie wrote: China WILL NOT go to war with the US in the topic of the islands. It has ZERO to gain for the losses needed to win (which they won't) China, if forced, WILL use those islands as a staging ground. Its much much easier for China to force America's hand. They have more fishermen and more resources than the neighboring countries do, they can just start using the islands for fishing and force the US to strike first. It will not take much to show the world that Trump is a loose cannon that can't be trusted. People already are in that mindset. And it won't take much to slowly push the message towards a union against the United States. Make tariffs against the US, cut off US production, and unify against Trump--in a Chinese attempt to restore order in the US. They don't need to fire a damn shot to win those islands and the world. People might have problems with the US - but a lot of those countries really don't like China. China itself has not all that many allies and most of its neighbors would be loathe to permit a Chinese garrison on their land. China says they would go to war over the islands - maybe they wouldn't actually do it and they're bluffing but if they're not, would you really be happy about the result? | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On January 25 2017 02:30 Doodsmack wrote: Trump's healthcare nominee says no one will lose coverage in repeal of Obamacare. Which, in essence, is a commitment to a large part of Obamacare. The only way for the middle class who got hit with increased premiums to get relief is for certain other people to lose coverage, unless we go to universal healthcare - which is the antithesis to those who oppose government run healthcare. Obamacare repeal seems to me like a minefield. Republicans don't want to stand up to the headlines of people losing coverage. Their hands are tied. Of course, it could just be an outright fabrication that people won't lose coverage. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On January 25 2017 02:38 LegalLord wrote: People might have problems with the US - but a lot of those countries really don't like China. China itself has not all that many allies and most of its neighbors would be loathe to permit a Chinese garrison on their land. China says they would go to war over the islands - maybe they wouldn't actually do it and they're bluffing but if they're not, would you really be happy about the result? Generally in international relations being not liked is better than being unreliable, and the US is heavily drifting into the direction of not being reliable at all. Also from the Diplomat today: http://thediplomat.com/2017/01/the-resurgence-of-china-vietnam-ties/ China is trying to rebuild their relationships in the region consecutively | ||
| ||
