|
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 December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Helps broker peace between North and South Korea.
Withdraws troops from Syria.
He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure...
Brokered peace? What the fuck world are you living in. Also, the much publicized goal was to denuclearize NK. Guess what....
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/16/north-korea-kim-jong-un-supervises-test-of-new-ultramodern-weapon
You're in an alternate reality.
EDIT: Before someone pops in and says "You don't know if the new weapons are nuclear or not", you don't announce the testing of an "ultramodern" Korean tomahawk.
|
|
|
On December 20 2018 10:22 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 10:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Helps broker peace between North and South Korea.
Withdraws troops from Syria.
He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc. We can afford the 2000 troops in Turkey. And it’s weird you would cite Saudi Arabia over Iran, rather than understanding that those two nations have been conflict for decades and are both dangerous. But then again, you have always has a pretty tenuous grasp of the facts.
Can’t really afford 2000 troops in Turkey.Budget deficits are a trillion dollars a year now, so should scale overseas bases and military back.Something Ron Paul was talking about 30 years ago.
It is bizarre to see hardcore democrats spin withdrawing US troops from foreign conflicts as a bad thing though.
|
|
|
Quoth the article:
Experts have said while decommissioning the site is an important diplomatic gesture, it will not affect the North’s nuclear arsenal.
“Pyongyang wants a spectacle that leaves an impression of good faith,” said Mintaro Oba, a former US diplomat who worked on North Korea policy. “But its recent statements affirm the substantive questions of denuclearisation are going to be much tougher.”
Earlier on Thursday, North Korea reminded the world it was not shy about verbally brandishing its nuclear weapons, saying the US had to choose whether it wanted to “meet us at a meeting room or encounter us at nuclear-to-nuclear showdown”.
|
Ahh yes.NK vs the entire world.Anyway they met and last i checked the nuclear holocaust hasn’t happened yet? NK and SK leaders meeting at the demilitarised zone.Trump achieved more in a year than others had for 60 years.
The goal with Syria needs to be stabilisation and rebuilding.Then start bringing the refugees home.Good luck to Assad and the people of Syria.
|
It achieved more but that isn't saying anything. They're still building nuclear missiles and they're still in the 1950's. They still have artillery lined up to level Seoul and enough bodies to clog up the demilitarized zone.
Granted Obama didn't deserve it either but he just got it because it was cool to hate on America at the time. Now its just kind of sad and depressing to hate on America.
Assad is never going to invite the rebels back to syria. Those refugees are never going back to syria. At best Trump has made the syrian civil war an low-intensity (insert african failed state here).
|
Ahahah, because destroying one test site after having successfully completed the development and test of your (1st gen?) nuclear weapon, is the target you wanted to be achieved ?
Hey guys, France did that 25years ago when we disabled Mururoa and Fangataufa nuclear test sites atolls ! France is now denuclearized !
Wait...
|
Let us also not forget that US are abandoning Kurdish fighters/people again. They "forgave" US for abandoning them in the 1991, but i seriously doubt they will forgive a second time. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
So US is basicly losing one ally for good, making any later conflicts way harder to navigate.
|
On December 20 2018 10:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Helps broker peace between North and South Korea.
Withdraws troops from Syria.
He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc.
Fuck's any of that got to do with peace?
You couldn't even manage to build your case over the course of two posts. The Nobel Peace prize isn't awarded to someone who does the best thing for their country at the expense of everyone else in the world.
|
Obama may have not "deserved" the Nobel, but what he did was bring enthusiasm and hope back into politics. A lot more people were engaged and there were a lot of massive laws passed around the world because of his style of diplomacy. He got a lot of young people involved and you see a lot of young people running for some type of office in the government. People who would have never thought about it, were galvanized to run and participate.
I think that, with Obama, you have to look at the large picture and not just the US. US popularity rose in his first term and then started to dwindle because a lot of stuff was out of his control. I think history will favor him far better than a lot of us have. trump is a publicity whore. He has no intention of ever doing anything that serves the broader people if it doesn't give him good press and access to more money (either him or his ilk).
|
On December 20 2018 13:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 10:22 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 10:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Helps broker peace between North and South Korea.
Withdraws troops from Syria.
He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc. We can afford the 2000 troops in Turkey. And it’s weird you would cite Saudi Arabia over Iran, rather than understanding that those two nations have been conflict for decades and are both dangerous. But then again, you have always has a pretty tenuous grasp of the facts. Can’t really afford 2000 troops in Turkey.Budget deficits are a trillion dollars a year now, so should scale overseas bases and military back.Something Ron Paul was talking about 30 years ago. It is bizarre to see hardcore democrats spin withdrawing US troops from foreign conflicts as a bad thing though.
Democrats would prefer the US doesn't randomly go and fuck shit up where they shouldn't be.
But once you went in and fucked shit up, you should clean up before leaving.
|
Also, there is still no peace treaty between North & South Korea. If he managed to do that I'll hang a poster of him in my wall!
US troops in Syria don't really appear in German media. Do/did they really fight there? What was the mission?
|
United Kingdom10010 Posts
On December 20 2018 20:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 13:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On December 20 2018 10:22 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 10:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Helps broker peace between North and South Korea.
Withdraws troops from Syria.
He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc. We can afford the 2000 troops in Turkey. And it’s weird you would cite Saudi Arabia over Iran, rather than understanding that those two nations have been conflict for decades and are both dangerous. But then again, you have always has a pretty tenuous grasp of the facts. Can’t really afford 2000 troops in Turkey.Budget deficits are a trillion dollars a year now, so should scale overseas bases and military back.Something Ron Paul was talking about 30 years ago. It is bizarre to see hardcore democrats spin withdrawing US troops from foreign conflicts as a bad thing though. Democrats would prefer the US doesn't randomly go and fuck shit up where they shouldn't be.But once you went in and fucked shit up, you should clean up before leaving.
Maybe some democrats, but as a whole I think this might be wrong.
|
On December 20 2018 21:18 schaf wrote:
Also, there is still no peace treaty between North & South Korea. If he managed to do that I'll hang a poster of him in my wall!
US troops in Syria don't really appear in German media. Do/did they really fight there? What was the mission?
Provide logistical support to the Kurds and other fighters. Provide them with air cover. We are basically hanging our allies out to dry in a fight they might not have committed to if the US didn’t have their back.
The US leaving doesn’t stop the conflict and increases the chance that it might spread.
|
On December 20 2018 21:22 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 20:53 Gorsameth wrote:On December 20 2018 13:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On December 20 2018 10:22 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 10:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote:On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Helps broker peace between North and South Korea.
Withdraws troops from Syria.
He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc. We can afford the 2000 troops in Turkey. And it’s weird you would cite Saudi Arabia over Iran, rather than understanding that those two nations have been conflict for decades and are both dangerous. But then again, you have always has a pretty tenuous grasp of the facts. Can’t really afford 2000 troops in Turkey.Budget deficits are a trillion dollars a year now, so should scale overseas bases and military back.Something Ron Paul was talking about 30 years ago. It is bizarre to see hardcore democrats spin withdrawing US troops from foreign conflicts as a bad thing though. Democrats would prefer the US doesn't randomly go and fuck shit up where they shouldn't be.But once you went in and fucked shit up, you should clean up before leaving. Maybe some democrats, but as a whole I think this might be wrong.
The future of the party, if folks like myself and Bernie have anything to say about it, will be far more anti-war than is the case currently. I think it’s fair to say that the Democratic establishment is either marginally pro conflict or indifferent enough to implicitly support it. One of my biggest gripes with Obama, for example, was how little he seemed to concern himself with what still appears to be adhoc bombing campaigns.
|
I think that was more of not wanting to put boots on the ground more than we needed to. After Afghanistan and Iraq, the public didn't want more people on the ground over there. So the government bombed away.
|
I think that’s correct while also being good evidence of the fact that Dems need to work on a war platform that admits how oversimple keeping boots off the ground is given how ubiquitous drone bombing and its ilk have become.
|
Depends on what the intention of keeping "boots off the ground" is. If the intention is to simply wage war without having a single death of your own military, then drones do an admirable job of doing so.
|
Indeed, which is why, for all the party’s claims to the moral high ground, far too few Dems actually try to reel in our military-industrial complex, instead feeling content to minimize US casualties while turning a blind eye to the obvious and rampant collateral damage wrought by bombing campaigns that seem to go on in perpetuity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
