|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On May 15 2018 17:44 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2018 17:12 iamthedave wrote:On May 15 2018 16:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 15:50 Falling wrote:On May 15 2018 13:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 12:19 Falling wrote:On May 15 2018 02:00 Plansix wrote:On May 15 2018 01:56 Mohdoo wrote:On May 15 2018 01:53 Plansix wrote:On May 15 2018 01:26 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
If this is what you are hoping for, you may as well hope for a meteor shower to selectively strike Israeli targets. It won't happen. If you let yourself entertain ideas where the US cuts support for Israel, you aren't being productive. You are describing the most ethical outcome, but that isn't really that hard to determine and we already know it isn't what will happen.
Is it that you actually see some sort of post-zionist America? Based on what you are saying, you are just (understandably) really mad about the situation. It's not that you actually think what you describe will happen. Am I wrong?
If someone asked you to place a $1,000 bet on whether what you described would happen or not, would you take that bet? Folks also need to remember there are over 4 million Palestinians in Israel. Relocation is about as realistic as the US suddenly dropping support for Israel. 4 million is huge, but not impossible. It is just a huge task. I don't think US support for Israel even compares. You are saying something really, really costly and really, really huge is the same as something impossible. We are an amazingly resourceful and capable people. We could do it if the will was there. We can do anything. If the entire middle east, with financial support from other major world countries, all agreed to just find places for palestinians, it would happen. Israel has been trying to force them to leave for decades. They won’t. That isn’t going to change without bloodshed. And considering the current stance of refugees in the US and EU, no one is going to accept them anyways. Also, that is almost half the population of Sweden. It isn’t a huge task. It would be the single largest relocation of a human population in modern history. Maybe all of history. Huge, but not impossible. 900,000 Jews exited North Africa and the Arab countries. Some 600,000 went to Israel, and 235,000 went to France. Places like Algeria went from 140,000 Jews to 1000 twenty-four years later to much pretty much none at all today. It's not impossible to leave: my people were chased up and down Europe for most of our history until we switched continents. Are you seriously citing that as an example of the plausibility without connecting any of the morality? "Well we could just do what the Nazi's did and then ban them from having human rights and they'll mostly leave on their own accord" Of course that would still require that the US offer Palestinians a country with the threat of total annihilation for anyone who threatens their survival and hundreds of billions in funding. I said nothing of the sort, unless I missed something and the Algerians were doing what the Nazis did. No, there was some incredulity in that many people moving, and I was observing that it could be possible (though granted the numbers were 1/4th of the current.) That is, we have already seen a massive emptying of the Jews from the Arab world, but there is no comparable Jewish refugee problem to speak of. They absorbed and moved on. So it's possible- that's all. ...I'm at a loss. You alluded to what I presume was Jewish heritage but you don't seem to have a basic grasp of the history adjoining the mass 'migration' you're referencing. I don't really have the time or inclination to goysplain your people's history to you, but rest assured you missed something about the history of Jewish people in Algeria and the entire migration you mentioned. But I have to focus on the absurdity that is the position that 'they absorbed and moved on'... If that was the case, they wouldn't have just killed dozens of civilians and injured thousands more while running an apartheid state. EDIT: This isn't directed at you specifically, but TL is seriously entertaining arguments in favor of ethnic cleansing and distinguishing it from genocide (barely) and yet people still wonder how everyday German people didn't stop the Nazi's... You're extremely quick to accuse people - myself especially right now - of arguing in favour of genocide when all I did was point out that nobody was going to stop it. I see no point in us going 'oh it's so awful oh Israel is just the worst, if only someone would step in and do something', when we all know that isn't going to happen. You want to discuss vague 'solutions' that conveniently ignore dozens of reasons why nobody is stepping in to do something about the situation beyond finger-wagging. I'm not justifying it. I accept that it is a thing that is happening about which I can do nothing and nobody in power wants to do anything. It's awful. It's horrible. So what? If the US properly, fully withdraws support from Israel then maybe there'd be some way to force Israel to the negotiating table. But as it stands they have all the cards, all the power, and a position of unassailable strength. The only way the Palestinians can get out of this is to give the Israelis everything they want and walk away from the table with their tails between their legs. They have no leverage, no way to influence the Israeli position. And HAMAS - the ones who don't recognise Israel's right to exist - are the ones who insist on 'negotiating'. Israel is not going to take negotiations with HAMAS seriously. I don't remember the US saying 'let's negotiate with Al Qaeda to prevent this horrible situation'. Do you? You can't negotiate with people whose fondest desire is to turn your nation into a crater. The only way this can end in anything but horror for the Palestinians is for there to be a seismic political shift on both sides. The international community has been trying to prod them to a peaceful solution for 70 years and we've gotten basically nowhere. If you want to seriously discuss the situation, instead of soap boxing about genocide/ethnic cleansing, then deal with the underlying political situation. Deal with the reality that if you were in Israel's shoes, you wouldn't want to deal with HAMAS because you know you can't trust them. Deal with the reality that the Palestinians have sabotaged the peace process as often as the Israelis have. Deal with the reality that Israel is a critical strategic partner in that part of the world, without whom your government would have very little legitimate 'ins' on the Middle East. Deal with the religious issues underpinning both sides of the conflict. Deal with Israel being the stated enemy of a lot of nations over there, secure only because they have western support and a lot of guns. Show you have a comprehensive understanding of all these issues and solutions to them, and then I'll give you all the credit in the world. But I just don't find 'genocide bad' to be much of a helpful sentiment when dealing with one of the most politically complex and long-running struggles in the world today. I'm not extremely quick, I'm being pretty judicious really. Pretty sure I mentioned the attitude of complacency, indifference, and inevitability as well. Those are arguments in favor of ethnic cleansing and/or genocide. Arguments against it generally start with refusing to empower people domestically which dogmatically encourage and sponsor such atrocities internationally. The adamant assertion of the futility of such political action isn't pragmatic, it's appalling. If it's not clear by my flagrant opposition to the US war machine, I would be a staunch critic of Netanyahu, the government, and their actions. I wouldn't advocate ethnic cleansing as a response to the situation and I'd be in the streets of Jerusalem or wherever I lived protesting (as I am digitally and locally). If as you say they aren't wanted, history tells us they were forced there in the first place, and Falling tells they are adept at moving and blending, then the far more sensible solution is for the Jewish people to leave and the US/international allies to pay for it. Surely with such international support for their ethnic cleansing campaign, there should be no shortage of countries willing and able to absorb the immigrants. Why should it be so obvious that the Palestinians leave if the Jewish people are only there on the will of countries outside of the region?
Do you think the Jewish people don't want to be there, GH? Do you think they'd actually leave if asked? They fought - and won - a war to defend Israel, way back when they were vulnerable and on the brink. Generations of Israelis have lived and died there now. I doubt even the most stringent anti-war Israeli wants to actually up sticks and leave Israel.
|
I agree that the power dynamic is vastly in Israel’s favor. But the phrase genocide denotes an immediately implementation of a systematic effort to wipe out a specific people. It is ongoing, sustained and is carried out by the dominate party. Israel’s efforts do not evoke what most people think of as genocide, which I would argue is intentional on the party of Israel. They are employing the “everything but” style of wiping out a given people. Rather than argue about if what they are doing is genocide, its easier to say that it wouldn’t take much for Israel to get there.
|
On May 15 2018 22:27 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2018 17:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 17:12 iamthedave wrote:On May 15 2018 16:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 15:50 Falling wrote:On May 15 2018 13:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 12:19 Falling wrote:On May 15 2018 02:00 Plansix wrote:On May 15 2018 01:56 Mohdoo wrote:On May 15 2018 01:53 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Folks also need to remember there are over 4 million Palestinians in Israel. Relocation is about as realistic as the US suddenly dropping support for Israel. 4 million is huge, but not impossible. It is just a huge task. I don't think US support for Israel even compares. You are saying something really, really costly and really, really huge is the same as something impossible. We are an amazingly resourceful and capable people. We could do it if the will was there. We can do anything. If the entire middle east, with financial support from other major world countries, all agreed to just find places for palestinians, it would happen. Israel has been trying to force them to leave for decades. They won’t. That isn’t going to change without bloodshed. And considering the current stance of refugees in the US and EU, no one is going to accept them anyways. Also, that is almost half the population of Sweden. It isn’t a huge task. It would be the single largest relocation of a human population in modern history. Maybe all of history. Huge, but not impossible. 900,000 Jews exited North Africa and the Arab countries. Some 600,000 went to Israel, and 235,000 went to France. Places like Algeria went from 140,000 Jews to 1000 twenty-four years later to much pretty much none at all today. It's not impossible to leave: my people were chased up and down Europe for most of our history until we switched continents. Are you seriously citing that as an example of the plausibility without connecting any of the morality? "Well we could just do what the Nazi's did and then ban them from having human rights and they'll mostly leave on their own accord" Of course that would still require that the US offer Palestinians a country with the threat of total annihilation for anyone who threatens their survival and hundreds of billions in funding. I said nothing of the sort, unless I missed something and the Algerians were doing what the Nazis did. No, there was some incredulity in that many people moving, and I was observing that it could be possible (though granted the numbers were 1/4th of the current.) That is, we have already seen a massive emptying of the Jews from the Arab world, but there is no comparable Jewish refugee problem to speak of. They absorbed and moved on. So it's possible- that's all. ...I'm at a loss. You alluded to what I presume was Jewish heritage but you don't seem to have a basic grasp of the history adjoining the mass 'migration' you're referencing. I don't really have the time or inclination to goysplain your people's history to you, but rest assured you missed something about the history of Jewish people in Algeria and the entire migration you mentioned. But I have to focus on the absurdity that is the position that 'they absorbed and moved on'... If that was the case, they wouldn't have just killed dozens of civilians and injured thousands more while running an apartheid state. EDIT: This isn't directed at you specifically, but TL is seriously entertaining arguments in favor of ethnic cleansing and distinguishing it from genocide (barely) and yet people still wonder how everyday German people didn't stop the Nazi's... You're extremely quick to accuse people - myself especially right now - of arguing in favour of genocide when all I did was point out that nobody was going to stop it. I see no point in us going 'oh it's so awful oh Israel is just the worst, if only someone would step in and do something', when we all know that isn't going to happen. You want to discuss vague 'solutions' that conveniently ignore dozens of reasons why nobody is stepping in to do something about the situation beyond finger-wagging. I'm not justifying it. I accept that it is a thing that is happening about which I can do nothing and nobody in power wants to do anything. It's awful. It's horrible. So what? If the US properly, fully withdraws support from Israel then maybe there'd be some way to force Israel to the negotiating table. But as it stands they have all the cards, all the power, and a position of unassailable strength. The only way the Palestinians can get out of this is to give the Israelis everything they want and walk away from the table with their tails between their legs. They have no leverage, no way to influence the Israeli position. And HAMAS - the ones who don't recognise Israel's right to exist - are the ones who insist on 'negotiating'. Israel is not going to take negotiations with HAMAS seriously. I don't remember the US saying 'let's negotiate with Al Qaeda to prevent this horrible situation'. Do you? You can't negotiate with people whose fondest desire is to turn your nation into a crater. The only way this can end in anything but horror for the Palestinians is for there to be a seismic political shift on both sides. The international community has been trying to prod them to a peaceful solution for 70 years and we've gotten basically nowhere. If you want to seriously discuss the situation, instead of soap boxing about genocide/ethnic cleansing, then deal with the underlying political situation. Deal with the reality that if you were in Israel's shoes, you wouldn't want to deal with HAMAS because you know you can't trust them. Deal with the reality that the Palestinians have sabotaged the peace process as often as the Israelis have. Deal with the reality that Israel is a critical strategic partner in that part of the world, without whom your government would have very little legitimate 'ins' on the Middle East. Deal with the religious issues underpinning both sides of the conflict. Deal with Israel being the stated enemy of a lot of nations over there, secure only because they have western support and a lot of guns. Show you have a comprehensive understanding of all these issues and solutions to them, and then I'll give you all the credit in the world. But I just don't find 'genocide bad' to be much of a helpful sentiment when dealing with one of the most politically complex and long-running struggles in the world today. I'm not extremely quick, I'm being pretty judicious really. Pretty sure I mentioned the attitude of complacency, indifference, and inevitability as well. Those are arguments in favor of ethnic cleansing and/or genocide. Arguments against it generally start with refusing to empower people domestically which dogmatically encourage and sponsor such atrocities internationally. The adamant assertion of the futility of such political action isn't pragmatic, it's appalling. If it's not clear by my flagrant opposition to the US war machine, I would be a staunch critic of Netanyahu, the government, and their actions. I wouldn't advocate ethnic cleansing as a response to the situation and I'd be in the streets of Jerusalem or wherever I lived protesting (as I am digitally and locally). If as you say they aren't wanted, history tells us they were forced there in the first place, and Falling tells they are adept at moving and blending, then the far more sensible solution is for the Jewish people to leave and the US/international allies to pay for it. Surely with such international support for their ethnic cleansing campaign, there should be no shortage of countries willing and able to absorb the immigrants. Why should it be so obvious that the Palestinians leave if the Jewish people are only there on the will of countries outside of the region? Do you think the Jewish people don't want to be there, GH? Do you think they'd actually leave if asked? They fought - and won - a war to defend Israel, way back when they were vulnerable and on the brink. Generations of Israelis have lived and died there now. I doubt even the most stringent anti-war Israeli wants to actually up sticks and leave Israel.
No, I don't. I get the impression that the Jewish population of Israel is quite attached to the land they were 'gifted' and that which they have stolen outright. Now would you care to answer my question?
|
The best path forward, imo, is to oppose Likud and its disciples at every turn while encouraging the political forces in Israel that recognize Palestinians as humans with legitimate interests. It can be easy to forget folks like that exist in significant numbers given who has been behind the wheel these past years.
|
On May 15 2018 22:08 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2018 21:42 Rebs wrote:On May 15 2018 21:40 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 15 2018 21:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 21:27 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 15 2018 21:23 Gahlo wrote:On May 15 2018 21:14 zlefin wrote:On May 15 2018 11:20 Gahlo wrote:On May 15 2018 10:14 zlefin wrote:On May 15 2018 10:06 Gahlo wrote:
[quote]
At what point do you think Israel will stop? Because the Palestinians aren't leaving and Israel keeps encroaching. I don't know when; but I don't need to, as the burden of proof is on you. Furthermore, the existence of various native american reservations is an indicator that it's possible for a people to be compressed into an area, cleansed otu of others, while not being completely obliterated. nor have you provided any decent counter to the point about population numbers. We have the benefit of hindsight to know what happened to the Native Americans. Regardless, not genociding them and performing widespread ethnic cleansing is nothing to pat the country on the back about."Congrats on not being 100% total evil." You have provided no proof that Israel will stop taking more and more land from the Palestinians. We have a repeated loop of a) take land b) kill people who try and fight back, justifying it as defense. Eventually, we'll get to the point where there is nowhere left for the Palestinians left to go in Palestine. From there it's: a) Isreal continues its pattern of behavior and completes the genocide b) decides to stop for... reasons? You need to prove that those reasons or decisions exist. Nothing that I know of does so. Either way, Isreal is a total assbag in this situation and the varying degrees of which is out of whack with the reaction that it gets. the burden of proof remains on you; so I don't need to prove that. My argument was solely about the use of the word genocide, which you did not establish, not whether Israel's behavior is acceptable. Sorry I don't wait for genocide to be complete before calling it out for what it is. I have the same attitude towards checkmate when I play chess. My opponents always end up really annoyed and I can't understand why. Sure, I haven't actually checkmated you yet, but I probably will so..... CHECKMATE. Perhaps when describing a situation people should try and stick to descriptions that correspond to reality in the present, not describe it as genocide because if no-one does anything there will eventually be genocide. Its Twitter language. People aren't racist anymore they're nazis. Israel isn't committing war crimes, its GENOCIDE because the word sounds more important, regardless of whether there is actual genocide occurring. Agreed in that Israel is trying to bring the international community to the same conclusion all but proposed here, ethnic cleansing isn't working, it's time for genocide. One problem being the inevitability of genocide is already being used to argue in favor/to justify the ethnic cleansing. I think part of the problem is that 'ethnic cleansing' sounds almost like a good thing, hell it is a good thing to over half the voting public. I just think (as I've argued many times in here) that accurate use of language is important, especially when trying to bring justice out of a situation like this. Israel is committing war crimes, blatantly. They are murdering innocent babies. Sniping civilians who pose no threat, and justice needs to be brought to the table at some point. Its just that when people start on the 'genocide' thing, it gives them an easy out. They can easily argue that there's no genocide, and the more realistic claims of war crimes and murder fall away under their denials. imho people should stick to the facts without the hyperbole. I know what you mean about 'ethnic cleansing'. I've always found this to be an inappropriate use of language anyway because it is an obvious attempt to whitewash a horrible situation with political language. I also agree that what some people are arguing in favor is basically ethnic cleansing. Ok so does this count as genocide + Show Spoiler +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre ? What does your question achieve, besides possibly baiting him into a "gotcha" situation? Either outright state your definition of genocide or outright ask his.
It was meant to bait a gotcha situation. Its not abou my definition of genocide, its the UN's definition or at the very least the commision tasked with investigating it along with most of the world, and I am largely inclined to agree with it. Read the link.
On May 15 2018 22:10 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2018 21:42 Rebs wrote:On May 15 2018 21:40 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 15 2018 21:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2018 21:27 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 15 2018 21:23 Gahlo wrote:On May 15 2018 21:14 zlefin wrote:On May 15 2018 11:20 Gahlo wrote:On May 15 2018 10:14 zlefin wrote:On May 15 2018 10:06 Gahlo wrote:
[quote]
At what point do you think Israel will stop? Because the Palestinians aren't leaving and Israel keeps encroaching. I don't know when; but I don't need to, as the burden of proof is on you. Furthermore, the existence of various native american reservations is an indicator that it's possible for a people to be compressed into an area, cleansed otu of others, while not being completely obliterated. nor have you provided any decent counter to the point about population numbers. We have the benefit of hindsight to know what happened to the Native Americans. Regardless, not genociding them and performing widespread ethnic cleansing is nothing to pat the country on the back about."Congrats on not being 100% total evil." You have provided no proof that Israel will stop taking more and more land from the Palestinians. We have a repeated loop of a) take land b) kill people who try and fight back, justifying it as defense. Eventually, we'll get to the point where there is nowhere left for the Palestinians left to go in Palestine. From there it's: a) Isreal continues its pattern of behavior and completes the genocide b) decides to stop for... reasons? You need to prove that those reasons or decisions exist. Nothing that I know of does so. Either way, Isreal is a total assbag in this situation and the varying degrees of which is out of whack with the reaction that it gets. the burden of proof remains on you; so I don't need to prove that. My argument was solely about the use of the word genocide, which you did not establish, not whether Israel's behavior is acceptable. Sorry I don't wait for genocide to be complete before calling it out for what it is. I have the same attitude towards checkmate when I play chess. My opponents always end up really annoyed and I can't understand why. Sure, I haven't actually checkmated you yet, but I probably will so..... CHECKMATE. Perhaps when describing a situation people should try and stick to descriptions that correspond to reality in the present, not describe it as genocide because if no-one does anything there will eventually be genocide. Its Twitter language. People aren't racist anymore they're nazis. Israel isn't committing war crimes, its GENOCIDE because the word sounds more important, regardless of whether there is actual genocide occurring. Agreed in that Israel is trying to bring the international community to the same conclusion all but proposed here, ethnic cleansing isn't working, it's time for genocide. One problem being the inevitability of genocide is already being used to argue in favor/to justify the ethnic cleansing. I think part of the problem is that 'ethnic cleansing' sounds almost like a good thing, hell it is a good thing to over half the voting public. I just think (as I've argued many times in here) that accurate use of language is important, especially when trying to bring justice out of a situation like this. Israel is committing war crimes, blatantly. They are murdering innocent babies. Sniping civilians who pose no threat, and justice needs to be brought to the table at some point. Its just that when people start on the 'genocide' thing, it gives them an easy out. They can easily argue that there's no genocide, and the more realistic claims of war crimes and murder fall away under their denials. imho people should stick to the facts without the hyperbole. I know what you mean about 'ethnic cleansing'. I've always found this to be an inappropriate use of language anyway because it is an obvious attempt to whitewash a horrible situation with political language. I also agree that what some people are arguing in favor is basically ethnic cleansing. Ok so does this count as genocide + Show Spoiler +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre ? I'm not too familiar with this case, but genocide is an attempt to wipe out or destroy an entire population, so if that's what happened then yeah. We're talking about the current situation here though, and it just doesn't qualify as a genocide, according to standardized definitions of the word. Talking in those terms only cheapens the daily crimes committed against the Palestinian people imo. If the Israeli government had their way, there would probably be genocide, but I don't think you could say any different about HAMAS. Neither is in a position to deliver on that so its purely hypothetical.
The idea of expulsion vis a vis ethnic cleansing would be a thing if a large enough chunk of Palestinians could actually go somewhere, they really cant. So they just keep getting killed. Its systematic, the intent is clearly to destroy, they just slowed it down because doing it as brazenly as Sabira and Shatila was bad PR. Just because the math isnt working out doesnt change what they are doing.
Regardless its a rather purposeless argument in semantics in the first place, not that such things are not without merit. But given this situation I dont believe it to be so.
Being worried about the improper use of Genocide vs ethnic cleansing is the sort of thing one would argue over when there is nothing else left to dispute. To me that its a point of contention at all at this moment is sad, regardless of how strongly you think it might actually matter.
"People is getting killed is Genocide!"
"No its not its Ethnic Cleansing.. get your facts straight, this improper usage cheapens your arguments."
Is it really that easy to cheapen this sort of thing by disputably labeling it?
HAMAS wouldnt exist if Sharon, if Bibi werent doing what they did. And Hamas is incapable of doing something the Israelis are basically doing. Again Hamas has acknowledged the possibility of accepting a foreign state. Power dynamic related motivations aside. That is something they added to their charter. Israel, has done no such thing. If Hamas is indeed an uncontrollable evil then why are the standards being applied differently to Likud ?
On May 16 2018 01:44 Plansix wrote:
You can make the debate about the label, rather than about the acts of violence and impact on the injuries party. Personally, I think there are plenty of evocative words that can be used to describe the violence yesterday that don't have the same baggage genocide has.
I think the very point is is to evoke said baggage. But ofcourse in the larger scheme of things, 50 people isnt a drop. But if you treat it as an ongoing thing (which it is), Palestenians die every other day, the protest every other day. The difference is its making the news because an orange anus decided to open a new building.
|
You can make the debate about the label, rather than about the acts of violence and impact on the injuries party. Personally, I think there are plenty of evocative words that can be used to describe the violence yesterday that don't have the same baggage genocide has.
|
This is pretty much open corruption, there's simply no honest dispute that the timing is not a coincidence. Recall that Trump backed off his threat to abandon the One China policy after China approved Trump's trademarks in the country - it was literally like a day before. In other words the America First policy is subject to the limitation of Trump's company being bribed. How this does not amount to one of the most serious offenses possible by a president is beyond me. To deny it is just simply to abandon your mental faculties; the only honest defense is to admit it while still attempting to justify Trump being in office overall.
A mere 72 hours after the Chinese government agreed to put a half-billion dollars into an Indonesian project that will personally enrich Donald Trump, the president ordered a bailout for a Chinese-government-owned cellphone maker.
“President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast,” Trump announced on Twitter Sunday morning. “Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!”
Trump did not mention in that tweet or its follow-ups that on Thursday, the developer of a theme park resort outside of Jakarta had signed a deal to receive as much as $500 million in Chinese government loans, as well as another $500 million from Chinese banks. Trump’s family business, the Trump Organization, has a deal to license the Trump name to the resort, which includes a golf course and hotels.
www.yahoo.com
|
|
|
On May 16 2018 01:45 Doodsmack wrote:This is pretty much open corruption, there's simply no honest dispute that the timing is not a coincidence. Recall that Trump backed off his threat to abandon the One China policy after China approved Trump's trademarks in the country - it was literally like a day before. In other words the America First policy is subject to the limitation of Trump's company being bribed. How this does not amount to one of the most serious offenses possible by a president is beyond me. To deny it is just simply to abandon your mental faculties; the only honest defense is to admit it while still attempting to justify Trump being in office overall. Show nested quote +A mere 72 hours after the Chinese government agreed to put a half-billion dollars into an Indonesian project that will personally enrich Donald Trump, the president ordered a bailout for a Chinese-government-owned cellphone maker.
“President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast,” Trump announced on Twitter Sunday morning. “Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!”
Trump did not mention in that tweet or its follow-ups that on Thursday, the developer of a theme park resort outside of Jakarta had signed a deal to receive as much as $500 million in Chinese government loans, as well as another $500 million from Chinese banks. Trump’s family business, the Trump Organization, has a deal to license the Trump name to the resort, which includes a golf course and hotels. www.yahoo.com
I love how is it coming after learning that ZTE sold US tech to NK and Iran. And now our president is going to help bail them out, even though our intelligence services have said the company is a security risk. This is not being tough on China.
|
On May 16 2018 01:56 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 01:45 Doodsmack wrote:This is pretty much open corruption, there's simply no honest dispute that the timing is not a coincidence. Recall that Trump backed off his threat to abandon the One China policy after China approved Trump's trademarks in the country - it was literally like a day before. In other words the America First policy is subject to the limitation of Trump's company being bribed. How this does not amount to one of the most serious offenses possible by a president is beyond me. To deny it is just simply to abandon your mental faculties; the only honest defense is to admit it while still attempting to justify Trump being in office overall. A mere 72 hours after the Chinese government agreed to put a half-billion dollars into an Indonesian project that will personally enrich Donald Trump, the president ordered a bailout for a Chinese-government-owned cellphone maker.
“President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast,” Trump announced on Twitter Sunday morning. “Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!”
Trump did not mention in that tweet or its follow-ups that on Thursday, the developer of a theme park resort outside of Jakarta had signed a deal to receive as much as $500 million in Chinese government loans, as well as another $500 million from Chinese banks. Trump’s family business, the Trump Organization, has a deal to license the Trump name to the resort, which includes a golf course and hotels. www.yahoo.com I love how is it coming after learning that ZTE sold US tech to NK and Iran. And now our president is going to help bail them out, even though our intelligence services have said the company is a security risk. This is not being tough on China.
"Those tariffs are totally targeted at China."
"It's a case of national security"
"We're going to put sanctions on states and companies that keep on trading with Iran"
"oh that chinese company who got in the news for trading with Iran and NK despite sanctions? Yeah, let's give them an exemption. But let's not forget, we're totally targeting China!"
|
The blood of the Palestinians killed in yesterday's protests is effectively on the US's hands, but we're too cowardly to acknowledge that. Nikki Haley walking out is pretty symbolic of the US's abdicating its leadership position on the international stage.
|
Presidents engage in corruption literally all the time and the US corporate media hushes it up. The difference is here it's effectively legal (or pardoned by the next president), in many other countries they get prosecuted.
|
On May 16 2018 02:38 Lazare1969 wrote:
Presidents engage in corruption literally all the time and the US corporate media hushes it up. The difference is here it's effectively legal (or pardoned by the next president), in many other countries they get prosecuted.
no; usually the corruption by US presidents is FAR less blatant, and of far lower magnitude. and the notion of corporate media hushing it up is very questionable; since first and foremost, they're corporations, they want money; and scandals == big money for news orgs.
|
On May 16 2018 02:29 ticklishmusic wrote:https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/996421654023688192The blood of the Palestinians killed in yesterday's protests is effectively on the US's hands, but we're too cowardly to acknowledge that. Nikki Haley walking out is pretty symbolic of the US's abdicating its leadership position on the international stage.
That is an embarrassment. Not only do we back Israel, but we won’t even hear Gaza speak after Israel opened fire on them. Just gross.
|
On May 16 2018 02:29 ticklishmusic wrote:https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/996421654023688192The blood of the Palestinians killed in yesterday's protests is effectively on the US's hands, but we're too cowardly to acknowledge that. Nikki Haley walking out is pretty symbolic of the US's abdicating its leadership position on the international stage.
This is horrendous. What a tragedy. Israel could be approximated to be a US military outpost, so the idea that we won't even listen to the people we are gunning town is awful. Shameful. Nikki Haley is a disaster.
|
On May 16 2018 02:47 Mohdoo wrote:This is horrendous. What a tragedy. Israel could be approximated to be a US military outpost, so the idea that we won't even listen to the people we are gunning town is awful. Shameful. Nikki Haley is a disaster. Considering earlier comments Nikki made that were then directly contradicted by the WH I expect she was told to do this.
Still, can blame her for not resigning over it.
|
While we're discussing the meaning of genocide here's an IDF account discussing the meaning of weapon of terror
2018 is like the death of parody accounts, they're completely useless now.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On May 16 2018 02:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 02:47 Mohdoo wrote:On May 16 2018 02:29 ticklishmusic wrote:https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/996421654023688192The blood of the Palestinians killed in yesterday's protests is effectively on the US's hands, but we're too cowardly to acknowledge that. Nikki Haley walking out is pretty symbolic of the US's abdicating its leadership position on the international stage. This is horrendous. What a tragedy. Israel could be approximated to be a US military outpost, so the idea that we won't even listen to the people we are gunning town is awful. Shameful. Nikki Haley is a disaster. Considering earlier comments Nikki made that were then directly contradicted by the WH I expect she was told to do this. Still, can blame her for not resigning over it.
I feel like the WH is just trying to prepare people for full on removal of Palestinians. When you kill 60 people and then walk out of the room, you are saying those people aren't even human. It's like someone convinced Pence all Palestinians are gay or something.
|
On May 16 2018 03:00 Nebuchad wrote:While we're discussing the meaning of genocide here's an IDF account discussing the meaning of weapon of terror 2018 is like the death of parody accounts, they're completely useless now. + Show Spoiler +
Wow... Amazing how colonial racism can make one's perception so radically out of touch with reality.
This is the kind of "terrorist threat" that they killed yesterday:
+ Show Spoiler +
RIP Fadi Abu Saleh... double "weapon of terror" (disabled civilian + rocks!!). First they took his land, then his legs, and finally his life.
|
On May 16 2018 03:13 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 03:00 Nebuchad wrote:While we're discussing the meaning of genocide here's an IDF account discussing the meaning of weapon of terror 2018 is like the death of parody accounts, they're completely useless now. + Show Spoiler + Wow... Amazing how colonial racism can make one's perception so radically out of touch with reality. This is the kind of "terrorist threat" that they killed yesterday: + Show Spoiler +RIP Fadi Abu Saleh... double "weapon of terror" (disabled civilian + rocks!!). First they took his land, then his legs, and finally his life.
I can't really imagine a situation in which rubber bullets wouldn't get this man to stop. In fact, I bet his rocks wouldn't go far enough to hit people with rubber bullet guns. If he was shot with live rounds, then there's no excuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DdJ_QNEUwAIW7Dh.jpg)
