|
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. |
On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP.
Irrevocably? No.
But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse.
The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top.
Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen.
Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago.
|
On July 13 2017 08:16 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 07:59 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:29 a_flayer wrote:On July 13 2017 07:23 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 06:51 a_flayer wrote:On July 13 2017 06:36 NewSunshine wrote:On July 13 2017 06:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 13 2017 06:23 NewSunshine wrote:On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that. Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else. We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities. There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses. If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!! Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't. I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore. I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing every problem being overshadowed by the constant screams of "Russia!". It's the same thing over and over. People seem to think it is acceptable to focus on something that has absolutely a negligible effect on western (or American, in this case) society at large. Even complaining when people express their opinions that they think there's much bigger issues than some insignificant country with the GPD of Italy that has goals which don't necessarily align with the goals of the society that we live in, but is constantly getting in the headlines because media companies know that people eat this shit up as the concept of "the foreign devil" is great clickbait. I don't know how I can help you understand. Russia is a problem that exists in the world, but it's not worth the attention that its receiving in the grander scheme of things. The media's consistent highlighting of this problem over others and driving the public conversation/narrative away from the things that affect people's every daily lives is ruining my mood. It isn't just the media or the public that's fixated, and to the extent they are fixated, it is because they have to be. Our Congress needs to spend time investigating, receiving testimonies, and passing legislation to protect sanctions (because apparently they don't trust the President to behave rationally towards Russia...) And the WH itself is fixated. Everyone is lawyered. Trump can't go a day without tweeting something insane about it. And you describe it as a small foreign-policy problem. I don't think you appreciate how serious this actually is, not in terms of legality or politics, but how damaging this is to America's foreign and domestic policies on all fronts. We are the world's empire, militarily. That's a precarious thing to be. We either have to bear some responsibility for the world, or we become a menace. The dangers of what Trump has done on the world stage is not something to take lightly, and has ramifications beyond description. Trump gave Putin a private 2-hour meeting, for which he cancelled an appearance at an actual G20 conference. Why? It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America. Your little empire is already a danger to the world, and it has nothing to do with Russia. I'm not going to list all the evils here and now as it's a very long list, but you should know full well what they are. On July 13 2017 07:23 Leporello wrote:
The ramifications are beyond what you're saying. You talk about Russia's GDP -- that doesn't matter. What matters is Putin's actions on the world stage, and what our allies think of him. It's not Russia's GDP they're concerned about. It's their insane aggression towards their neighbors, and the lies they attempt to tell about it.
It's a giant nuclear arsenal, run by what is, in all actuality, the world's biggest criminal -- a man who has amassed over a $100 billion dollars over a career of "public service" over an economically-poor country. That's a LOT of blood money.
I don't like to stoke fear and sensationalism, but to compare Russia's importance on foreign-affairs by referring to their ransacked GDP numbers is kind of... off-base. This isn't cozying up to some banana republic. This is the POTUS cozying up, publicly, to a man that our allies rightfully consider to be one of the world's greatest evils. And yet, somehow, I'm not particularly worried about Putins access to nuclear weapons. There's a certain person that I consider to be far more dangerous, regardless of his potential connections to Russia, who has an equal amount of nuclear weapons at his disposal. Yes, America has many bad moments throughout history. But I think it's a simplification to use that comparison in regards to current events. Look, I don't worry about Putin launching nukes either. Just like I don't think Putin kills his political opponents, at least not anytime remotely recent. You're absolutely right to think America is the bigger threat, compared to Russia. But that's kind of my point... What I'm worried about is how much worse things can and will be if America doesn't confront Russia in this problem fully, and head-on. This is a cultural war, one of actual importance that's hard to overstate. The problem is largely media, in both countries. And I daresay, in this comparison, Russia loses badly compared to the U.S. You think it's bad our media frenzies over drawing blood from the President? Well, I wish all countries, like Russia, had that problem with their media. All the fears one has of Putin, the worst of it is that so much of it is beyond Putin's control. For example: Putin didn't kill Boris Nemstov, because his country of nationalists will do that stuff for him. He didn't kill Boris, he created an entire culture that kills people for him. That "85% approval" that Trump brags about, in defense of Putin? That's the scary part. The scary part is having a President who calls that a democracy, and seemingly seeks to see the same in America. Can you imagine that America? What you SHOULD be ABSOLUTELY worried about, if you live near Russia especially, is what happens when the propagandist leaves or dies, and the propagandized take over. What happens when you have a Russian President who has listened, for most of his life, to his country's media glorify the idea of nuking Western countries, as they do. And it is very much that same culture that Trump is bringing to America. You don't see the danger of Russian influence on American culture? Really? The war on media, the subversion of checks and balances? As bad as America may have been, as you allude to, do you not think it could get much, much worse? The thing is you can't separate what Trump is doing to America, from Trump's relationship with Russia. This story of "collusion" isn't just sprung from random investigations. It's a reaction to Donald's words and actions on the world-stage. What Trump is doing as POTUS is essentially copying the Putin modus operandi. Maybe the Putin-culture doesn't scare you coming Russia, but it will terrify the fuck out of you when it's coming from America. It does me. I don't see anything happening in American culture as a result of Russian influence. It's true that Russia is on the conservative side of the global culture war, just like Republicans and Salafists, but it's not their doing. This cultural conflict has sprung up from advances in technology (internet + social media), just like what happened in the early 20th century (radio + literacy). I think that any notion that blames Russia or indeed any external force for this conflict undermines any attempts at finding peaceful internal solutions to the problems that have arisen. It's not that Russian culture is forcibly taking over America as a result of actions undertaken by the Russian government. That is a ridiculous notion. There is just no way that a country with so little wealth could ever have that much influence over the media empires of the west. This cultural conflict has always existed within America, and indeed in countries all over the globe at any point in history. Externalizing the problem in the way it is happening now is an incredibly flawed and short-sighted approach to any potential solution.
I don't find it ridiculous. I'm seeing it everyday. Again, it's not wealth. They're not buying our media (except sometimes http://thehill.com/homenews/media/340292-russian-radio-takes-over-local-dc-station), they're subverting it and noising it up. It IS becoming much like the media culture of Russia, where everything is treated like tabloids, and there is no mutually-agreed upon level of legitimacy or credibility.
Our most credible media institutions are being dismissed by the Trump-flock in favor of propaganda, and it's pretty much the same brand of propaganda as I see from Russian media. "Fake News" has become carte-blanche for dismissing what should be agreed-upon facts.
You have major TV "news" hosts, like Sean Hannity, giving a platform to Julian Assange, even after our own intelligence agencies have declared that he's basically a Russian-hire. They (and by they, I mean everyone from the President himself on down), have been openly hostile to our last 2 FBI Directors, for no reason other than Russia.
You have a President who insults the FBI Director and praises Putin. I just don't know how it could be much clearer.
|
On July 13 2017 08:30 Leporello wrote:
You have major TV "news" hosts, like Sean Hannity, giving a platform to Julian Assange, even after our own intelligence agencies have declared that he's basically a Russian-hire.
Our government agencies can't shut up news they don't like. This is a good thing.
|
On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago.
I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China.
Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison.
|
On July 13 2017 08:39 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:30 Leporello wrote:
You have major TV "news" hosts, like Sean Hannity, giving a platform to Julian Assange, even after our own intelligence agencies have declared that he's basically a Russian-hire. Our government agencies can't shut up news they don't like. This is a good thing.
No one is asking Fox News to be shut-down by the government.
But I, for one, am wishful that a news organization would give credibility to the FBI over a person like Julian Assange. It's disturbing that a major cable news network has gone down this path, and I wouldn't compare it to anything, really.
edit: I'm out for today, apologies for not replying further.
|
Fox isn't even news to me at this point. The narrative right now is that CNN is all horrible, but Fox is just the most bizarre, ignorant echo-chamber full of pro-Trump spin you can imagine. Nobody whose primary source of information is Fox knows anything about politics right now.
|
On July 13 2017 08:49 NewSunshine wrote:
Fox isn't even news to me at this point. The narrative right now is that CNN is all horrible, but Fox is just the most bizarre, ignorant echo-chamber full of pro-Trump spin you can imagine. Nobody whose primary source of information is Fox knows anything about politics right now.
Correction: nobody whose primary source of information is FOX knows anything TRUE about politics right now. The parable of the 'low information voter' was always bullshit. The danger is people believing what Hannity says is true.
|
On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison.
When Trump calls every trade agreement 'the worst deal in the history of mankind' and wants to tear them down, this is the kind of thing that happens.
Not believing it doesnt mean its not true.
|
On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison.
This isn't really so hard to understand, is it.
Europe US relations before fallout: decent, investments made.
Europe China relations before fallout: meh, investments made, but nowhere near the realms of the US.
Europe US relations after fallout: frozen, investments still made.
Europe China relations after fallout: warming, investments being ramped up massively.
Europe US relations after recovery: warming, investments still made.
Europe China relations after recovery: according to you, suddenly frozen now, with the investments being stopped..? In reality, the relations will still be decent, and investments are still being made on a level that wasn't seen before. Except the US lost influence massively.
And while no, people here are very clear that china isn't a great country, the consensus is that neither is the US. The US on the other hand led nato countries into a illegitimate war based on lies. Spied on our leaders and manufacturers.
No, china isn't better in regards to nationalism, and while many suspect that they spy, manipulate etc, the US has proven more than once that it does. I honestly can't criticise someone for trusting china more than the US, because as it stands currently, there's no reasonable explanation why one shouldn't. Or, the other way around, think of the US the same way you assume we should think of china.
Oh, there's one very, very important fact missing in your whole "well we'll just zero it out then after we're buddies again". There's quite the possibility that the EU will start thinking (again) about dropping the weapons embargo against china. This time with no US influence on the decision.
Sidenote: the chinese national football team (youth) is now playing in the german regional league, thought that's a funny tidbit.
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/texas-planned-parenthood-teen-abortion_us_59653229e4b09b587d63018a
NEW YORK ― Republicans are trying to find a way to defund Planned Parenthood as part of an overall effort to limit abortion in America. But doing so had the opposite effect in Texas, according to a new study based on research from Texas A&M University.
The study, conducted by economics professor Analisa Packham (now at Miami University), shows that in the first three years after Texas Republicans slashed the family planning budget in 2011 and shut down more than 80 women’s health clinics, the abortion rate among teenagers in the state rose 3 percent over what it would have been had the clinics remained open. After cutting Planned Parenthood out of the state’s subsidized women’s health program, then-Gov. Rick Perry (R) said his “goal” was to “ensure abortions are as rare as possible under existing law.” But the move actually interfered with an overall downward trend in abortions in Texas.
“This certainly isn’t the way to have fewer abortions,” said Dr. Diane Horvath-Cosper, an OB-GYN in Maryland and an advocate with Physicians for Reproductive Health. “The abortion rates nationally have decreased and are at a historic low. So for Texans to see an increase in adolescent abortions is really telling ― it seemed to have followed the national trend until these clinics were defunded.”
|
On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison.
Its not the nationalism that is a problem for EU-US international relations. Its stability.
China is politically stable and has shown little interest in interfering in EU politics or dragging anyone into wars.
The US on the other hand can swing rather wildly depending on which party has the Presidency. And no one likes such schizophrenic changes every 4-8 years.
|
On July 13 2017 09:08 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison. This isn't really so hard to understand, is it. Europe US relations before fallout: decent, investments made. Europe China relations before fallout: meh, investments made, but nowhere near the realms of the US. Europe US relations after fallout: frozen, investments still made. Europe China relations after fallout: warming, investments being ramped up massively. Europe US relations after recovery: warming, investments still made. Europe China relations after recovery: according to you, suddenly frozen now, with the investments being stopped..? In reality, the relations will still be decent, and investments are still being made on a level that wasn't seen before. Except the US lost influence massively. And while no, people here are very clear that china isn't a great country, the consensus is that neither is the US. The US on the other hand led nato countries into a illegitimate war based on lies. Spied on our leaders and manufacturers. No, china isn't better in regards to nationalism, and while many suspect that they spy, manipulate etc, the US has proven more than once that it does. I honestly can't criticise someone for trusting china more than the US, because as it stands currently, there's no reasonable explanation why one shouldn't. Or, the other way around, think of the US the same way you assume we should think of china. Oh, there's one very, very important fact missing in your whole "well we'll just zero it out then after we're buddies again". There's quite the possibility that the EU will start thinking (again) about dropping the weapons embargo against china. This time with no US influence on the decision. Sidenote: the chinese national football team (youth) is now playing in the german regional league, thought that's a funny tidbit.
I'm not sure where you're going with your scenario, and it's far too simple a model to be of any use. Also, I never said that Europe was suddenly going to stop investing in China. That's an invention of your own that you attributed to me somehow.
Judging from your tone and hyperbole, I'm never going to convince you that the US isn't an evil imperialist monster. On the other hand, I encourage you to read more about China, and how it treats its people, its neighbors, etc. While China has been relatively isolationist thus far, look historically at how similar countries tend to handle foreign disputes once they obtain power. It generally isn't pretty. China is still a developing economy with limited military power. Of course it's going to be playing ball in foreign relations when the CCP needs international trade to satiate its people through hyper-rapid economic growth. Think about when how the CCP is going to treat diplomatic relations after it has a military behind it, more economic might, and a more secure position among its populace. Especially since China considers itself to be the victim of historical injustice by Western colonial powers, and the CCP still teaches it to distrust the West in the Chinese state school system.
The US is easy to criticize because of its leadership position, but don't let that blind you from reality. The US government is a totally different animal from the autocratic rule of the CCP. Yes it's made mistakes, but it has generally done so in the interest of maintaining a liberal and peaceful international order. Before you start saying the goals haven't been achieved, keep in mind that no country can do everything. The US has its own resource limitations in achieving its international goals.
Luckily, international heads of states generally have a cooler head than you, and aren't going to start encouraging a CCP-led world order because the US had Trump as a president for <4 years. Furthermore, I'm sure they realize that Trump is deeply unpopular in his own country--his views don't necessarily reflect the US population, who will be electing future presidents.
I'm not saying that the US is immune to decline in its global leadership power, but it's going to take several truly terrible presidents to make the world actively try to pivot to a China-led world order.
Also, I'm expecting to "educated" by about 10 posters here about the US military-industrial complex and all sorts of ulterior motives for US foreign policy. I've heard it before; no need to lecture me.
|
On July 13 2017 08:30 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:16 a_flayer wrote:On July 13 2017 07:59 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:29 a_flayer wrote:On July 13 2017 07:23 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 06:51 a_flayer wrote:On July 13 2017 06:36 NewSunshine wrote:On July 13 2017 06:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 13 2017 06:23 NewSunshine wrote:On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that. Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else. We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities. There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses. If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!! Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't. I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore. I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing every problem being overshadowed by the constant screams of "Russia!". It's the same thing over and over. People seem to think it is acceptable to focus on something that has absolutely a negligible effect on western (or American, in this case) society at large. Even complaining when people express their opinions that they think there's much bigger issues than some insignificant country with the GPD of Italy that has goals which don't necessarily align with the goals of the society that we live in, but is constantly getting in the headlines because media companies know that people eat this shit up as the concept of "the foreign devil" is great clickbait. I don't know how I can help you understand. Russia is a problem that exists in the world, but it's not worth the attention that its receiving in the grander scheme of things. The media's consistent highlighting of this problem over others and driving the public conversation/narrative away from the things that affect people's every daily lives is ruining my mood. It isn't just the media or the public that's fixated, and to the extent they are fixated, it is because they have to be. Our Congress needs to spend time investigating, receiving testimonies, and passing legislation to protect sanctions (because apparently they don't trust the President to behave rationally towards Russia...) And the WH itself is fixated. Everyone is lawyered. Trump can't go a day without tweeting something insane about it. And you describe it as a small foreign-policy problem. I don't think you appreciate how serious this actually is, not in terms of legality or politics, but how damaging this is to America's foreign and domestic policies on all fronts. We are the world's empire, militarily. That's a precarious thing to be. We either have to bear some responsibility for the world, or we become a menace. The dangers of what Trump has done on the world stage is not something to take lightly, and has ramifications beyond description. Trump gave Putin a private 2-hour meeting, for which he cancelled an appearance at an actual G20 conference. Why? It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America. Your little empire is already a danger to the world, and it has nothing to do with Russia. I'm not going to list all the evils here and now as it's a very long list, but you should know full well what they are. On July 13 2017 07:23 Leporello wrote:
The ramifications are beyond what you're saying. You talk about Russia's GDP -- that doesn't matter. What matters is Putin's actions on the world stage, and what our allies think of him. It's not Russia's GDP they're concerned about. It's their insane aggression towards their neighbors, and the lies they attempt to tell about it.
It's a giant nuclear arsenal, run by what is, in all actuality, the world's biggest criminal -- a man who has amassed over a $100 billion dollars over a career of "public service" over an economically-poor country. That's a LOT of blood money.
I don't like to stoke fear and sensationalism, but to compare Russia's importance on foreign-affairs by referring to their ransacked GDP numbers is kind of... off-base. This isn't cozying up to some banana republic. This is the POTUS cozying up, publicly, to a man that our allies rightfully consider to be one of the world's greatest evils. And yet, somehow, I'm not particularly worried about Putins access to nuclear weapons. There's a certain person that I consider to be far more dangerous, regardless of his potential connections to Russia, who has an equal amount of nuclear weapons at his disposal. Yes, America has many bad moments throughout history. But I think it's a simplification to use that comparison in regards to current events. Look, I don't worry about Putin launching nukes either. Just like I don't think Putin kills his political opponents, at least not anytime remotely recent. You're absolutely right to think America is the bigger threat, compared to Russia. But that's kind of my point... What I'm worried about is how much worse things can and will be if America doesn't confront Russia in this problem fully, and head-on. This is a cultural war, one of actual importance that's hard to overstate. The problem is largely media, in both countries. And I daresay, in this comparison, Russia loses badly compared to the U.S. You think it's bad our media frenzies over drawing blood from the President? Well, I wish all countries, like Russia, had that problem with their media. All the fears one has of Putin, the worst of it is that so much of it is beyond Putin's control. For example: Putin didn't kill Boris Nemstov, because his country of nationalists will do that stuff for him. He didn't kill Boris, he created an entire culture that kills people for him. That "85% approval" that Trump brags about, in defense of Putin? That's the scary part. The scary part is having a President who calls that a democracy, and seemingly seeks to see the same in America. Can you imagine that America? What you SHOULD be ABSOLUTELY worried about, if you live near Russia especially, is what happens when the propagandist leaves or dies, and the propagandized take over. What happens when you have a Russian President who has listened, for most of his life, to his country's media glorify the idea of nuking Western countries, as they do. And it is very much that same culture that Trump is bringing to America. You don't see the danger of Russian influence on American culture? Really? The war on media, the subversion of checks and balances? As bad as America may have been, as you allude to, do you not think it could get much, much worse? The thing is you can't separate what Trump is doing to America, from Trump's relationship with Russia. This story of "collusion" isn't just sprung from random investigations. It's a reaction to Donald's words and actions on the world-stage. What Trump is doing as POTUS is essentially copying the Putin modus operandi. Maybe the Putin-culture doesn't scare you coming Russia, but it will terrify the fuck out of you when it's coming from America. It does me. I don't see anything happening in American culture as a result of Russian influence. It's true that Russia is on the conservative side of the global culture war, just like Republicans and Salafists, but it's not their doing. This cultural conflict has sprung up from advances in technology (internet + social media), just like what happened in the early 20th century (radio + literacy). I think that any notion that blames Russia or indeed any external force for this conflict undermines any attempts at finding peaceful internal solutions to the problems that have arisen. It's not that Russian culture is forcibly taking over America as a result of actions undertaken by the Russian government. That is a ridiculous notion. There is just no way that a country with so little wealth could ever have that much influence over the media empires of the west. This cultural conflict has always existed within America, and indeed in countries all over the globe at any point in history. Externalizing the problem in the way it is happening now is an incredibly flawed and short-sighted approach to any potential solution. I don't find it ridiculous. I'm seeing it everyday. Again, it's not wealth. They're not buying our media (except sometimes http://thehill.com/homenews/media/340292-russian-radio-takes-over-local-dc-station), they're subverting it and noising it up. It IS becoming much like the media culture of Russia, where everything is treated like tabloids, and there is no mutually-agreed upon level of legitimacy or credibility. Our most credible media institutions are being dismissed by the Trump-flock in favor of propaganda, and it's pretty much the same brand of propaganda as I see from Russian media. "Fake News" has become carte-blanche for dismissing what should be agreed-upon facts. You have major TV "news" hosts, like Sean Hannity, giving a platform to Julian Assange, even after our own intelligence agencies have declared that he's basically a Russian-hire. They (and by they, I mean everyone from the President himself on down), have been openly hostile to our last 2 FBI Directors, for no reason other than Russia. You have a President who insults the FBI Director and praises Putin. I just don't know how it could be much clearer.
It may be becoming "more like Russia", I don't speak Russian nor do I live in their culture, so I don't know how their media presents itself within their country. I don't think you do either. Maybe they are very tabloid oriented, I don't know. It doesn't really matter. It's not Russia that's making our media more like that (tabloid oriented). It's greedy CEOs and people who want clickbait internet articles for their own personal gain or fame. Beyond that, it's the advancement in communication technology that fuels the polarization which is the source of the dismissal of facts (the concept of the information bubble applies here, which has very little to do with Russian media).
I'm also not trying to say that Russia can't have influence because they can't afford to buy western media companies. That's not what I meant, although I admit I phrased it poorly. I'm saying that influence in general is a matter of wealth. If you have a lot of wealth, then you have a lot of potential influence in the media. The combined wealth of the western media outmatches Russian media by such enormous numbers, it just doesn't compare. Russia is barely a blip on the radar in this matter. The vast majority of wealth/media that is on the conservative side of the culture war on the western side of the globe comes directly from the United States.
You don't seem to comprehend the concept of the global culture war and how it is not caused by the likes of Trump and Putin. It has been happening for a long time, even before they existed as notable entities. And it is now being fuelled through, once again, new technologies in communication which makes it so that "cultural differences" (poorly phrased) are more noticeable through increased exposure (think of things like the violence on black people being on smartphone videos), while the concept of the information bubble (which is also part of the technological development) spins and/or selectively uses these differences to suit the viewers perspective, hence the increasing polarization within this culture war.
The following article takes a very feminist approach to describe the issue at hand, but the lead-in paragraph gives a good overview of the most extreme expressions of this problem as it existed in various countries around the world when the article was written. Note the date.
May 17, 1999
In the past ten years, nationalist, communalist and religious fundamentalist social movements have surfaced all over the world, moving into the power vacuum created as local elites have been overwhelmed by the new global financial ruling class. The emerging struggle is not between East and West, as Samuel Huntington would have it, but within both; it is a struggle between the forces of globalization and the atavistic social movements that have sprung up to oppose it. Civilian populations, especially ethnic minorities, women and children, are caught in between. Among such movements are the Taliban in Afghanistan; the Serbian nationalist movement (and its opposing counterparts elsewhere in the former Yugoslavia); Islamic fundamentalist movements in Egypt, Algeria and elsewhere; the Hindu communalist movement in India; the Israeli settler movement in the West Bank; and a whole range of militantly patriarchal Christian groups, from the militias to Operation Rescue, in the United States.
Source
Perhaps you can see how the things described in the paragraph above still exist today and perhaps have evolved over the past two decades.
Now, it's true that Trump and Putin are riding the conservative side of this war which helps them achieve their popularity, and perhaps Putin has more influence on this than I give him credit for, but I don't think they're the instigators. Certainly not Trump. This is all simply the result of, once again, rapid advancements in communication technologies and the inability of human society at large to adapt to it on the fly. Blaming current leaders for problems that have existed in human nature for thousands of years is ridiculous.
|
On July 13 2017 09:31 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison. Its not the nationalism that is a problem for EU-US international relations. Its stability. China is politically stable and has shown little interest in interfering in EU politics or dragging anyone into wars. The US on the other hand can swing rather wildly depending on which party has the Presidency. And no one likes such schizophrenic changes every 4-8 years.
And that's really the problem. If the Republicans were somewhat sensible and consistent, it'd be something. But they're clearly not, a lot of their opinions shift dramatically just because Fox News drum up some narrative. The majority of opinion polls show a dramatic shift in opinion towards Russia/Putin the minute Fox News started drumming up support for Trump. Similarly with regards to things like the the current state of the economy that can't realistically change in a matter of months.
Republicans, unlike China, aren't remotely ideologically consistent at this point, outside of certain social issues like supporting Confederate monuments, cutting taxes and abolishing abortion.
|
On July 13 2017 09:53 rageprotosscheesy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 09:31 Gorsameth wrote:On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison. Its not the nationalism that is a problem for EU-US international relations. Its stability. China is politically stable and has shown little interest in interfering in EU politics or dragging anyone into wars. The US on the other hand can swing rather wildly depending on which party has the Presidency. And no one likes such schizophrenic changes every 4-8 years. And that's really the problem. If the Republicans were somewhat sensible and consistent, it'd be something. But they're clearly not, a lot of their opinions shift dramatically just because Fox News drum up some narrative. The majority of opinion polls show a dramatic shift in opinion towards Russia/Putin the minute Fox News started drumming up support for Trump. Similarly with regards to things like the the current state of the economy that can't realistically change in a matter of months. Republicans, unlike China, aren't remotely ideologically consistent at this point, outside of certain social issues like supporting Confederate monuments, cutting taxes and abolishing abortion.
I think you meant to say: Increasing abortion rates by eliminating access to contraceptives.
|
On July 13 2017 10:09 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 09:53 rageprotosscheesy wrote:On July 13 2017 09:31 Gorsameth wrote:On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison. Its not the nationalism that is a problem for EU-US international relations. Its stability. China is politically stable and has shown little interest in interfering in EU politics or dragging anyone into wars. The US on the other hand can swing rather wildly depending on which party has the Presidency. And no one likes such schizophrenic changes every 4-8 years. And that's really the problem. If the Republicans were somewhat sensible and consistent, it'd be something. But they're clearly not, a lot of their opinions shift dramatically just because Fox News drum up some narrative. The majority of opinion polls show a dramatic shift in opinion towards Russia/Putin the minute Fox News started drumming up support for Trump. Similarly with regards to things like the the current state of the economy that can't realistically change in a matter of months. Republicans, unlike China, aren't remotely ideologically consistent at this point, outside of certain social issues like supporting Confederate monuments, cutting taxes and abolishing abortion. I think you meant to say: Increasing abortion rates by eliminating access to contraceptives.
Conservatives like to close their eyes and think they're accomplishing something by outlawing abortions, but that works about as well as the prohibition did, or the war on drugs.
|
On July 13 2017 09:53 rageprotosscheesy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 09:31 Gorsameth wrote:On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison. Its not the nationalism that is a problem for EU-US international relations. Its stability. China is politically stable and has shown little interest in interfering in EU politics or dragging anyone into wars. The US on the other hand can swing rather wildly depending on which party has the Presidency. And no one likes such schizophrenic changes every 4-8 years. And that's really the problem. If the Republicans were somewhat sensible and consistent, it'd be something. But they're clearly not, a lot of their opinions shift dramatically just because Fox News drum up some narrative. The majority of opinion polls show a dramatic shift in opinion towards Russia/Putin the minute Fox News started drumming up support for Trump. Similarly with regards to things like the the current state of the economy that can't realistically change in a matter of months. Republicans, unlike China, aren't remotely ideologically consistent at this point, outside of certain social issues like supporting Confederate monuments, cutting taxes and abolishing abortion.
You're missing the reactionary element. It's very consistent to oppose the group of people that despise who you are and what you do. Dems are great if you're a poor Democrat voter or a minority. If you're white, or poor but oppose their poverty ideas, or middle class, you're resented or hated. They made it a little too obvious with the "deplorables" comment from Hillary and the constant drum beat of "Trump voters are racist."
If Democrats concealed their message of disunity and dislike of uneducated flyover voters, they'd have a better shot at winning elections. Now, they're basically stuck pandering to their coastal base and firing jabs at Trump (makes himself an easy target, obviously) and talking about how dumb everybody is with their ideological inconsistencies. This script--convincing poor families struggling to get by that they're members of the privileged class and didn't like Obama because he was black or Hillary because she was a woman--will take years to rewrite.
Current plan seems to be doubling down on the widespread electoral disasters of the last seven years.
|
United States44194 Posts
Are we forgetting that the Trump voters actually didn't like Obama because he was black? Or are we just not supposed to talk about that? Birtherism didn't happen in a vacuum.
|
On July 13 2017 10:19 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 09:53 rageprotosscheesy wrote:On July 13 2017 09:31 Gorsameth wrote:On July 13 2017 08:44 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:29 m4ini wrote:On July 13 2017 08:18 mozoku wrote:On July 13 2017 08:02 Leporello wrote:On July 13 2017 07:31 m4ini wrote:It isn't just the American press. The German press has been much less forgiving or reserved on this issue. German's most popular newspapers regularly refer to Trump as a Russian menace. The German chancellor says, in public, that they can't rely on America.
Not sure which newspapers you refer to, usually german newspapers (unlike Bild, which is less newspaper and more tabloid/yellow press) are pretty impartial on the issue. Mind, i don't disagree with anything you said, but as a german, that feels new to me. Mostly referring to what I've seen from Der Spiegel. I'm not going to pretend to regularly read German periodicals, but what I've seen from Der Spiegel is enough to make me realize that America's image has been irrevocably changed for the worse. edit: and Merkel's direct quotes. Those are saddening. "Irrevocably" is hyperbole, outside of left-wing echo chambers. Trump has barely accomplished anything substantive that the next president can't undo in a month. He withdrew from TPP, but Hillary and Bernie were going to do that anyway. It wouldn't be shocking to see TPP revived in some form in the future anyway. He withdrew from the Paris Climate agreement, but that isn't anywhere near large enough to cause irrevocable damage to the US diplomatic future (on its own, at least). The irony here is that, despite the doomsayers claiming Trump represents death to America's democracy, it's the US institutions and his unpopularity that largely restrained him from accomplishing anything actually harmful long-term. If the US has a reasonable president or two after Trump, the world is going to be more concerned with being aligned with the world's largest economy/military that also supports democratic ideals than worrying about that country's failed nutcase president 10 years ago. The international community is largely pragmatic; look at how many countries are friendly with China (or even Russia) despite it being ruled by the human rights disaster that is the CCP. Irrevocably? No. But you seem to be missing the point that the german views of the US are declining for more than a decade now. Merkel just said what germans already thought more than 10 years ago, and it didn't get better from there, but worse. The harm already is done, you just seem to be too shortsighted to see it. Politically we got ice age now. That doesn't mean that we stop trading. But you now pushed other countries to get friendlier with china, something that won't stop after you try to fix the problems. Regardless of what happens from now, you strengthened ties between china and europe. Ties that won't get cut once you got a decent president again, the same way ties didn't get cut between europe and the US despite constant scandals plus a supreme leader on top. Oh sidenote, that "supports democratic ideals" is yet to be seen. Btw i don't see Trump as death to american democracy. As a former soldier, that one died long ago. I don't buy your argument. Europe is going to get closer to China because the US isn't liberal enough currently, but after the US presumably "re-liberalizes" Europe is going to continue to get closer to China? In your scenario, there's a Europe who's terribly bothered by a more nationalist US, but is apparently infinitely tolerant of a far more nationalist China. Another asymmetric assumption is that Europe can cool their relations with the US, but not with China. As Europe gets closer with China, they're going to run into a lot more points of tension than they ever did with the US. A post-Trump US will look much more attractive by comparison. Its not the nationalism that is a problem for EU-US international relations. Its stability. China is politically stable and has shown little interest in interfering in EU politics or dragging anyone into wars. The US on the other hand can swing rather wildly depending on which party has the Presidency. And no one likes such schizophrenic changes every 4-8 years. And that's really the problem. If the Republicans were somewhat sensible and consistent, it'd be something. But they're clearly not, a lot of their opinions shift dramatically just because Fox News drum up some narrative. The majority of opinion polls show a dramatic shift in opinion towards Russia/Putin the minute Fox News started drumming up support for Trump. Similarly with regards to things like the the current state of the economy that can't realistically change in a matter of months. Republicans, unlike China, aren't remotely ideologically consistent at this point, outside of certain social issues like supporting Confederate monuments, cutting taxes and abolishing abortion. You're missing the reactionary element. It's very consistent to oppose the group of people that despise who you are and what you do. Dems are great if you're a poor Democrat voter or a minority. If you're white, or poor but oppose their poverty ideas, or middle class, you're resented or hated. They made it a little too obvious with the "deplorables" comment from Hillary and the constant drum beat of "Trump voters are racist." If Democrats concealed their message of disunity and dislike of uneducated flyover voters, they'd have a better shot at winning elections. Now, they're basically stuck pandering to their coastal base and firing jabs at Trump (makes himself an easy target, obviously) and talking about how dumb everybody is with their ideological inconsistencies. This script--convincing poor families struggling to get by that they're members of the privileged class and didn't like Obama because he was black or Hillary because she was a woman--will take years to rewrite. Current plan seems to be doubling down on the widespread electoral disasters of the last seven years.
odd; then why does the Republican message of disunity and their open numerous insults to many Americans, and their dislike of people who live in cities/coasts, succeed?
it's a mirror of the same thing; so why does it work for one and not the other?
|
On July 13 2017 06:36 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2017 06:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 13 2017 06:23 NewSunshine wrote:On July 13 2017 06:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't understand how some of you still aren't getting this...
The story isn't the "scandal" the story is that this is all theater and you're all going to be disappointed/surprised when it turns out to basically go nowhere (despite how bad it is) and act like folks like myself didn't see this a mile away and tried desperately to get you to see that. Assume what you say is true, I and hopefully most others are familiar with elected officials having a history of not receiving the punishment they deserve for the shit they pull off. That doesn't mean for a moment that I'm just going to accept what they do as normal, and just not mention it. You have your priorities, please don't project them on me or anyone else. We are sooooo far beyond "mentioning it", yeah, if your priority is following every little drip of this Trump/Russia story imo you have bad priorities. There are Americans dying/suffering simply because politicians don't see the political advantage in helping them, and they don't get headlines because people like yourself are more likely to click Russia stories and the 6 corporations who own most of the media don't particularly like stories focused on how their greed and exploitation contributes to such abuses. If people engrossed themselves in the suffering and deaths of so many Americans as they are this Russia nonsense we might actually have a chance at addressing them, but no, Russia!!!!!!! Which, hey, if we were actually going to do something about it, would be an interesting news story, but we aren't, so it isn't. I don't think you have any idea how exhausting it is seeing you come into every argument, and doing the same thing over and over. You never think an issue is worth the exposure it gets because you think there's always a more important issue, and you repeatedly, and unprovoked, lambaste people for not holding the same list of "correct priorities" that you do. If you don't understand why consistently breaking evidence in a large-scale scandal is getting headlines and occupies discussion, I don't know how I can help you. Multiple problems are allowed to exist, just because one story is developing doesn't mean there are no other problems in the world, or that people aren't aware of them. You think you're some kind of savior reminding people of all the woes of the world, but most of us are pretty generally aware of how shitty things are. Your consistent derailing of discussions about unrelated topics is growing old, and I'm not in the mood to indulge it anymore.
One of these days he'll either convince you that you're (1) barking up the wrong tree if you want to change Trump getting away with everything or (2) just as stubborn at doing the same thing over and over (making the same mistake over and over) as he is. If the Russia thread of agitation and group paranoia is high on your priority list, start opening yourself up to the idea that the theater feeds Trump. You're literally making your problems bigger. It's like the hardcore baseball fan that reads every tidbit of possible trades with his team in the offseason--GH's accurate "following every little drip" priority critique. It will consume your attention and give you myopic focus that fucks up any attempt to grasp the big picture. You'll lose easy elections, or maybe barely squeak by some easy elections, by focusing on the next silver stake that sinks Trump.
Secondly, your earlier "my opponents refuse to accept information" shows you're about as resistant to change as everybody else that looks for the easy-out way that shortcuts examination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
