The US Presidency 2018
- Thread starter FJAG
- Start date
- Status
- Reaction score
- 4,716
- Points
- 1,160
Altair said:
How Democrats went from JFK and "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" to 1% socialists and social justice warriors is beyond me.
- Reaction score
- 6,097
- Points
- 1,160
To follow Jar's lead, I'm really getting tired of 'The World Ends Tomorrow because of Trump'.
Can't we just have a discussion without all the woe is me and conflated future actions?
Why does it always have to be nuclear winter that's the result.
Know what? Things have ways of sorting themselves without the predictions of apocolypse. Kenedy brought us way closer to obliteration than Trump ever could so how bout we just knock it off.
The world is not going to blow up, so please ratchet back to reality and try discuss things without all the far fetched stuff that's supposed to happen in some people's minds.
The Soviets are not going to invade us. Petroleum will flow to whoever, even if someone turns off their taps. The ME is just plain fucked and we have no business even being there, let alone help them. They need to slaughter each other without us.
Dialogue is always preferable to force. Even if you just sit with the enemy and ask what's what. It's how things get resolved.
I don't mind predictions but let's keep them real eh?
Can't we just have a discussion without all the woe is me and conflated future actions?
Why does it always have to be nuclear winter that's the result.
Know what? Things have ways of sorting themselves without the predictions of apocolypse. Kenedy brought us way closer to obliteration than Trump ever could so how bout we just knock it off.
The world is not going to blow up, so please ratchet back to reality and try discuss things without all the far fetched stuff that's supposed to happen in some people's minds.
The Soviets are not going to invade us. Petroleum will flow to whoever, even if someone turns off their taps. The ME is just plain fucked and we have no business even being there, let alone help them. They need to slaughter each other without us.
Dialogue is always preferable to force. Even if you just sit with the enemy and ask what's what. It's how things get resolved.
I don't mind predictions but let's keep them real eh?
I don’t think anyone is saying the world will end. But the US standing in the free world is taking a beating.
You can have dialogue with your foes (remember everyone’s reaction to Jack Layton wanting to talk to the Taliban?) but you also don’t have to put up with their BS.
Kennedy was still talking to the Russians despite the show of force. Reagan was talking to Gorbachev but had no issues telling him to tear down the wall and open the gate.
There is no reason why Trump couldn’t have said that he wants to normalise relations but that attacks on his country ‘s democratic systems will not nor ever be tolerated.
Instead he opted for self preservation. He can’t differentiate a cyber attack on his own country from a separate investigation into collusion and has to mix it up for whatever reason.
Now the back tracking is making things worse.
You can have dialogue with your foes (remember everyone’s reaction to Jack Layton wanting to talk to the Taliban?) but you also don’t have to put up with their BS.
Kennedy was still talking to the Russians despite the show of force. Reagan was talking to Gorbachev but had no issues telling him to tear down the wall and open the gate.
There is no reason why Trump couldn’t have said that he wants to normalise relations but that attacks on his country ‘s democratic systems will not nor ever be tolerated.
Instead he opted for self preservation. He can’t differentiate a cyber attack on his own country from a separate investigation into collusion and has to mix it up for whatever reason.
Now the back tracking is making things worse.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
RecceGuy: question: What do you think a leader of a country should say or do about Russia? Dialogue or condemn? Just curious.recceguy said:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Reaction score
- 1,688
- Points
- 1,060
Trump has so far exceeded my expectations on the entertainment value of his Presidency. The excitement he generates among Canadians is slightly bemusing to me. We live in the shadow of the elephant so everything down south has import up here but still...The man is not to be taken to seriously, he is what he is, too expect him to have changed because he is President was and is unrealistic. In my opinion he is and will be known as a poor President, but at most he will serve 8 yrs. I expect NATO and Canada's relationship with the US to survive much better than many are letting on. From afar, it looks to me like we could do a much better job of managing this relationship than we have been doing. To me that is another black mark on the leadership of our own government, something I am much more concerned about, naturally. There is a lot of smoke with regards to the Trump campaign and Russian interference and I am inclined to think probably a little fire but I doubt it will reach Trump himself as I just can't see anyone bringing him into that circle. It will be interesting to see how the intelligence community, the rest of the executive, and the Senate/House behave going forward. I can see them all working their own agendas separate from not only each other but the President to an unprecedented degree at least compared to the recent past.
- Reaction score
- 6,097
- Points
- 1,160
RocketRichard said:
Condemnation simply perpetuates stalemate.
I see nothing wrong with talking. It may lead nowhere or maybe make matters worse. But there is nothing wrong with talking and casting about for mutually beneficial common ground. When talk is over, there's only one alternative.
I dont care much for the Soviets, having spent my whole life learning to kill them, if they were to trip the wire. However, I would like to think we'd exhaust all other possibilities before they did.
If you've never done the UGLI ORANGE dialogue exercise, have a look. https://www.coursehero.com/file/11371085/ugliorangesactivity/
It is one my favourite conflict resolution exercises.
Given how Trump was pillored for attempting to end the conflict on the Korean Peninsula, I expect his detractors will pillor him for talking to the Queen. I really dont care. He gets good press elsewhere. Might even get nominated for a Nobel as some Europeans want to put him up for. Not my circus and my monkeys fly. Talk is better than war. Even if it's against your enemy.
His recent gaffe is not part of the conversation for me. My concern is how people would rather retain the status quo with no chance of peace rather than explore the possibility. It would almost appear that people like McCain would rather be bombed with their own uranium than concede Trump is trying to make some peace.
Perhaps some are worried Putin might give something to Trump to hurt them politically or financially. It would really suck, for some, if Putin gave the Russia side of the uranium buy and players, set up by Clunton.
Just me, but I think history is going to be much kinder to Trump than his detractors today are.
- Reaction score
- 6,097
- Points
- 1,160
suffolkowner said:
I agree with much that you say. Not all. I can see them finally saying enough is enough and Mueller is going to be told to shit or get off the pot. This masquerade has gone on long enough.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,948
- Points
- 1,160
One day this will all be a yet another boring chapter in the history books that some bored student is going to be forced to read grudgingly because it's "ancient history" and is not relevant to them. History is much more interesting when you live it. We fail to realize those words in the history books had far more meaning to the people that lived in that time, than to the majority of us.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,748
- Points
- 1,040
I don't buy the "would -> wouldn't" excuse. It sounds like something cooked up by a brainstorming session among the public affairs kids.
I'm curious to see which way everything lands. Only two things stand out as consistent in whatever could be called Trump's "foreign policy": all the players accustomed to assuming the US will do something (various contributions) or not do something (eg. tolerate rampant IP theft), a list of which is mostly allies, will have to confront the possibility/reality of accepting more responsibility/cost; and the US is likely to be less interventionist (mostly of interest to those on the list of unfriendlies).
It will be ironic if Trump is more successful than Obama at letting regional powers flex more power in their regions, and reducing foreign entanglements.
I'm curious to see which way everything lands. Only two things stand out as consistent in whatever could be called Trump's "foreign policy": all the players accustomed to assuming the US will do something (various contributions) or not do something (eg. tolerate rampant IP theft), a list of which is mostly allies, will have to confront the possibility/reality of accepting more responsibility/cost; and the US is likely to be less interventionist (mostly of interest to those on the list of unfriendlies).
It will be ironic if Trump is more successful than Obama at letting regional powers flex more power in their regions, and reducing foreign entanglements.
Altair
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 717
- Points
- 1,110
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/07/17/politics/trump-interpreter-testify-congress/index.html
If republicans are actually as outraged about the presidents comments as they say they are, they should back any request for that interpreter to testify.
I for one would be interested about what was said behind closed doors, considering the presser he gave in public.
If republicans are actually as outraged about the presidents comments as they say they are, they should back any request for that interpreter to testify.
I for one would be interested about what was said behind closed doors, considering the presser he gave in public.
- Reaction score
- 6,097
- Points
- 1,160
This is really going beyond the point of ridiculous. It simply cements my opinion of politicians as a bunch of spiteful, spoiled children.
That is the reason Trump got elected in the first place. People are tired of these arseholes and their games. Games that accomplish nothing, cost millions and stall government action.
And it's not country specific.
That is the reason Trump got elected in the first place. People are tired of these arseholes and their games. Games that accomplish nothing, cost millions and stall government action.
And it's not country specific.
Altair
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 717
- Points
- 1,110
Shame he needs the two other branches of the executive branch to be able to govern.recceguy said:
Branches that, if you follow the money, might be turning blue.
https://www.nbcnews.com/card/democrats-outraise-republicans-top-house-contests-n892001
If they do turn blue come November, and put a stop to the presidents agenda, I hope that come 2020, the damage to the USA isn't too bad to fix over the next 10 years or so. Assuming that the president doesn't get re-elected.
- Reaction score
- 10,367
- Points
- 1,260
recceguy said:
Not sure if "crap or get off the pot" and "masquerade" are completely accurate. Some media organizations like to portray the Mueller investigation as some sort of overdrawn affair, but the numbers don't support this assertion.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mueller-investigation-keeps-growing-fast/
If you look at the chart in the attached article, since the Nixon administration Mueller's investigation has been the shortest to date and has produced the most indictments.
Attachments
recceguy said:
I don't know if over 200 charges laid against 35 people, five already resulting in guilty please can be called 'nothing', nor 'ridiculous'. And Mueller is now seeking immunity for five previously unnamed witnesses in the Manafort trial- five more individuals who would not testify for fear of self incrimination. As major investigations go, this one is very, very productive- Infanteer nicely showed how this is the case.
Frankly I think it's more a matter of you really don't like what is happening because of your own very heavily hard right bias that we have all become accustomed to over the years here.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,748
- Points
- 1,040
Regarding charges against people who will actually have to answer (Americans):
Manafort and Gates - fraud/money crimes.
Flynn, Van der Zwaan, Papadopoulos - false statements.
Pinedo - fraud.
Not much bang for the effort. The rest (the Russians) should properly have been left with low-key CI.
Every government and its hangers-on has many skeletons to be found, if only someone is given a mandate to root around for them. There will be more investigations in future with authority to pursue "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation". There will be more people who make false statements, some about matters that are embarrassing but are not crimes, and more people who plead guilty to a lesser crime when threatened with the unpredictable risk of defending against a laundry list (commonplace in the US, and alarming to many civil libertarians).
If the increased productiveness of the investigation represents a trend, is it favourable?
As has been pointed out by several people over the past couple of days, other countries can apply the same rules to Americans.
Andrew McCarthy's view. (Read and consider the final paragraph if nothing else.)
Manafort and Gates - fraud/money crimes.
Flynn, Van der Zwaan, Papadopoulos - false statements.
Pinedo - fraud.
Not much bang for the effort. The rest (the Russians) should properly have been left with low-key CI.
Every government and its hangers-on has many skeletons to be found, if only someone is given a mandate to root around for them. There will be more investigations in future with authority to pursue "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation". There will be more people who make false statements, some about matters that are embarrassing but are not crimes, and more people who plead guilty to a lesser crime when threatened with the unpredictable risk of defending against a laundry list (commonplace in the US, and alarming to many civil libertarians).
If the increased productiveness of the investigation represents a trend, is it favourable?
As has been pointed out by several people over the past couple of days, other countries can apply the same rules to Americans.
Andrew McCarthy's view. (Read and consider the final paragraph if nothing else.)
- Status
Similar threads
