• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Czech_pivo said:
We have an dependency issue that we need to address.
Click to expand...
The issue isn't dependency, it's peer competition. We have a parliamentary democracy and are disposed to behave like subjects rather than citizens, a continuation of a mix of British and French influence. Next to us is a republic which made a clean break with Europe and much of European governance, with very strongly written constitutional provisions for individual rights and a lot of voting. Despite not following our path, it succeeds and often overachieves. We lag badly behind Americans in consuming power, but we comfort ourselves with a handful of other things (chiefly, public health care, and a vague notion that we are more caring). But public health care is, if stakeholders are to be believed, in crisis, and caring seems mainly to consist in agreeing to more publicly-funded programs offering increasing levels of service.

We tell ourselves we're more virtuous, but our virtue isn't being rewarded and we are clearly falling behind. Dissonance. As consolation, some of us take every opportunity to gloat at their misfortunes. I don't think that really makes the gloaters happier.
 
I still cant believe that people can look at the system to the South which has been buckling for at least 2 decades domestically and internationally and say "ya, I want me some of that". Its insanity to be a critic of the middle east wars on one side of the mouth and claim some sort of political or moral superiority on behalf of the same system that created those wars and the untold chaos and suffering they generated.
 
PrairieFella said:
I still cant believe that people can look at the system to the South which has been buckling for at least 2 decades domestically and internationally and say "ya, I want me some of that". Its insanity to be a critic of the middle east wars on one side of the mouth and claim some sort of political or moral superiority on behalf of the same system that created those wars and the untold chaos and suffering they generated.
Click to expand...

You sound very Trumpian.
 
Czech_pivo said:
Its funny, yet sad, to read about all of this back and forth about a US President. I've been lucky enough to live in 5 countries, 3 in Europe and in Canada and the US. In all of this and all of my travels, I'm certain that no country obsesses more about another country than Canada does with the US. I understand that geographically we are located right next to each other, I understand that culturally we have been similar in the past (though some significant differences are appearing, I understand that are are dominated by them in both population and economy - but Ireland doesn't obsess with the UK in the same manner, Holland doesn't obsess with Germany in the same manner, Austria doesn't obsess with Germany in the same manner, Switzerland doesn't obsess with France/Germany/Italy in the same manner. We have an dependency issue that we need to address.
Click to expand...

Your lense may be too narrowly focused. While the European countries that you cite as examples may not be "obsessed" with neighbours in your experience of living abroad (apologies if my assumption of you being there is abroad, instead of you being here is abroad), if you go back an extra generation or two, their obsessions (fears) makes the Canadian preoccupation of our relationship with the USA seem like high school dating dynamics. Prior to 1939 (or 1914, or 1870, or . . .) any of the mismatched pairs focused similar significantly greater attention on the more powerful/obnoxious/threatening neighbour than Canada does toward our southern border.

Their solutions were wars. When that got too expensive in blood and treasure, they went the alliance route (economic and defense). So far that has been a reasonably stable experiment. Though the "obsession" of the UK about what its neighbours wanted did lead to BREXIT. North America's history is still in the juvenile stage.
 
PrairieFella said:
I still cant believe that people can look at the system to the South which has been buckling for at least 2 decades domestically and internationally and say "ya, I want me some of that". Its insanity to be a critic of the middle east wars on one side of the mouth and claim some sort of political or moral superiority on behalf of the same system that created those wars and the untold chaos and suffering they generated.
Click to expand...
Depends on framing and how crudely you're trying to put people in a bucket. For most libertarians and many isolationist-leaning conservatives, this is the frame:

  • The constitution and constitutional order and aspirations of the founders are the system, and it is generally good. In particular, avoiding foreign entanglements is one of the aspirations.
  • The administrations that prosecuted Middle Eastern wars did so despite and outside the mechanics and ideals of the system. In particular, R2P- and interventionist-leaning people were responsible.

The specific people (Republicans/conservatives usually summarized as neo-cons) who prosecuted the Iraq war told themselves they could kick over Hussein's tyranny and some kind of democracy would arise without much if any effort from the US. But even Jerry Pournelle, a self-admitted conservative hawk ("right of Attila the Hun"), parted ways with them. It was the neo-cons who rejected all the other non-conforming conservatives (movement, paleocon, whatever). David Frum wrote a keystone essay published in NR, Unpatriotic Conservatives. Ironically, after berating people he accused of siding with anti-war progressives, he is now himself aligned with progressives.
 
Brad Sallows said:
The issue isn't dependency, it's peer competition. We have a parliamentary democracy and are disposed to behave like subjects rather than citizens, a continuation of a mix of British and French influence. Next to us is a republic which made a clean break with Europe and much of European governance, with very strongly written constitutional provisions for individual rights and a lot of voting. Despite not following our path, it succeeds and often overachieves. We lag badly behind Americans in consuming power, but we comfort ourselves with a handful of other things (chiefly, public health care, and a vague notion that we are more caring). But public health care is, if stakeholders are to be believed, in crisis, and caring seems mainly to consist in agreeing to more publicly-funded programs offering increasing levels of service.

We tell ourselves we're more virtuous, but our virtue isn't being rewarded and we are clearly falling behind. Dissonance. As consolation, some of us take every opportunity to gloat at their misfortunes. I don't think that really makes the gloaters happier.
Click to expand...
When you say 'we are clearly falling behind', in what metric's are you referring to:

1) Child mortality?
2) Life span?
3) Education?
4) Poverty rates?
5) Number people on food stamps?
6) Home ownership?
7) Victims of violent crimes?
8) Incidents of mass shootings?
9) Prevalence of STD's?
or is it strictly based on GDP? Or number of millionaires? Or distribution of wealth? Or if you work for a large, wealthy company, access to quick, efficient health care at a substantial price?

Have you lived/worked on both sides of the border? Do you have greater than 75% of your family living/working in the US? Do you have dual citizenship? I have all 3 of the above checked off. I have many, many good things to say about both countries and can see/understand the benefits of living in both places but to say a blanket statement like you did is wrong (in my opinion) and does not look at the sum of all the parts but merely 1 or 2 or 3 particular things. If you want to be 'rich' (however you would personally define that), I would suggest look at moving to the UAE in place of the US - you won't have to worry about gun crimes, random violent acts against you, your kids/wife can walk to school or in the neighbourhood in safety, you can make USD, pay little to no taxes and be surrounded by others seeking the same sort of lifestyle.
 
QV said:
Ah.. so innocent then.
Click to expand...

But definitely unpatriotic and unethical.

Mueller reported there was evidence of criminal obstruction in Volume 2. Congress, as the “prosecutor”, chose to punt. Mostly because Pelosi feared the gong-show an impeachment trial would become.
 
Czech_pivo said:
When you say 'we are clearly falling behind', in what metric's are you referring to:

1) Child mortality?
2) Life span?
3) Education?
4) Poverty rates?
5) Number people on food stamps?
6) Home ownership?
7) Victims of violent crimes?
8) Incidents of mass shootings?
9) Prevalence of STD's?
or is it strictly based on GDP? Or number of millionaires? Or distribution of wealth? Or if you work for a large, wealthy company, access to quick, efficient health care at a substantial price?
Click to expand...
Purchasing power, or any other crude measure of the capacity to consume. After enough time, their worst-off will move up enough relative to ours so that the effect is beyond quibbling. The rich are irrelevant. Among and below the middle class matters.

I consider it axiomatic that freedom and security (meaning well-being and safety) are in tension, but mere observation suggests the reasonable latitude for individual liberties and self-reliance is well above where Canada sets it.

Consider all the countries of the Americas in 1820, 1920, 2020. Have meaningful differences emerged?

To advance human welfare, grow-the-pie eventually beats divide-the-pie.

I find many Canadians are simultaneously too prideful and too envious, which makes it hard for us to change because change is a kind of admission of defeat.
 
I don't remember ever encountering the claim mentioned here, from Wesley Clark, that the Bush administration had a "seven countries in five years" war concept to reshape the ME. (The video clip is - at least to me - amusing.)

It's surreal. Does anyone remember reading/hearing it contemporaneously? Was it some kind of misinterpretation on Clark's part, or some kind of prank?
 
Brad Sallows said:
I don't remember ever encountering the claim mentioned here, from Wesley Clark, that the Bush administration had a "seven countries in five years" war concept to reshape the ME. (The video clip is - at least to me - amusing.)

It's surreal. Does anyone remember reading/hearing it contemporaneously? Was it some kind of misinterpretation on Clark's part, or some kind of prank?
Click to expand...

A couple of articles from 2003 (Slate and Al Jazeera) which reference the claim that was made in a book by Clark. At the time Clark was seeking the nomination as Democratic Party presidential candidate (he withdrew from the race and supported Kerry).

slate.com

Wesley Clark's scathing new book.

The first half of Gen. Wesley Clark's new book, Winning Modern Wars: Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire, is every bit as dull and drably...
slate.com slate.com

www.aljazeera.com

US ‘plans to attack seven Muslim states’

Presidential hopeful General Wesley Clark says the White House devised a five-year plan after the 9/11 strikes to attack seven majority-Muslim countries.
www.aljazeera.com www.aljazeera.com
 
Ah The guy who delighted in screaming at subordinates and the guy Mike Rose basically told to go f**k himself.
 
Why concentration camps fail.
“the Nazis initially imagined their targets would self-deport. Once the myth of self-deportation collapsed, they turned to more punitive measures.”
www.msnbc.com

Don’t call it ‘Alligator Alcatraz.’ Call it a concentration camp.

This facility’s purpose fits the classic model, and its existence points to serious dangers ahead for the country.
www.msnbc.com www.msnbc.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top