US Elections 2016

[jake]

Trump going to be another 9/11 style conspiracy theory magnet. Still, it keeps the loons on their laptops and away from the general population.

 

Meanwhile the sensible people believe the peaceful president and let loose 26,000 bombs.

Not dangerous at all.

 

Take it you typed that on your laptop.

[Francis Albert]

Meanwhile the sensible people believe the peaceful president and let loose 26,000 bombs.

Not dangerous at all.

 

Take it you typed that on your laptop.

Trump's nominee being pressed to declare Putin a war criminal because he bombed civilians. But of course Obama's bombs never touched civilians.

[JamboX2]

Ah FDR.

One of the originals.

Leader of the american navy which bravely blew the wooden ships of spain apart.

 

It wasnt for black gold though(oil)

But for whit gold (sugar)

 

Well rewarded he was

The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself.

The New Deal.

The North Atlantic Charter.

The Charter of the United Nations.

Re-building a broken economy.

Breaking up the banks.

Re-vitalising the US agricultural industries.

Winning 3 terms.

Making solid relations with the USSR.

Throwing US economic might at Germany.

Lend-Lease to the UK.

 

You've got to take the good with the bad and FDR is by far and a way the greatest US President of the 20th Century.

[JamboX2]

FDR the president who opposed anti lynching legislation.

Prisoners of their times. Took till LBJ to bring about civil rights in law.

 

Before FDR's death he wanted to bring about a Second Bill of Rights to constitutionally protect a lot of these things. However, death and the fact he lead a party still Southrrn orientated hurt that.

 

Thomas Jefferson had slaves, still helped write "we hold these truths as self evident, that all men are created equal".

 

You need to read into things in the context of their times. To not do so is to ignore a lot of the goings on and societal norms of people at the time.

 

At this rate no historical figure can be regarded as a "Great Person". You have to take the bad with the good.

[JamboX2]

I would argue that after the burning down of one of his embassies, an ambassador and three others killed (40 rescued) to go on TV, basically apologise to a swathe of people who were burning and killing across the world cos of a pretty historically accurate video, blame this barbarism on said videos' provocation' then cook up tax charges against the maker of the video to appease these loons was pretty undignified. That and a few other instances of similar appeasement aside I generally admired his show of character.

Pardon?

[JamboX2]

Can you be dignified and bomb people to protect business interests .

Or are we still kidding on its for the greater good .

Or for the protection of american life.

Or for the defence of its mainland.

 

You do realise that national interests have always included the interests of national trade and economics? Us, the Germans, the French, the Americans, Chinese, Japanese and so on and so forth as far back as the Romans have made military decisions not just on who attacks you but what protects your interests. Read up on Biafra for a great example of how economics and war and national interest is mixed.

 

Can you be dignified and bomb people? Given you are conflating two things which were unrelated in this discussion before - yes you can. As UA says in carrying out his duties Obama has spoke better and carried himself (and his policies at home and abroad) than his predecessor and will have done so more than his successor.

 

The USA is operating on a militaryscale globally like no other before it. But do you think a man who actively called on in the election to target the families of terrorists or ISIS fighters a sound and competent human being to carry out the role of Commander in Chief?

 

Obama has escalated drone warfare in an attempt to get American boots off the ground in the middle east. What good it does I don't know. But for every American drone bomb we've had this year we've also had Turkish and Russian amd Syrian ones (and Iranian). So I don't know nor get why we make a special example of western nations.

 

What about Russian actions in Syria?

What about us and France?

What about Saudis in Yemen?

 

Btw is it only oil rich countries who defy american business interest with bad human rights that are bombed or do they bomb other evil regimes ?

 

Silly question.

 

It's the paradox of middle eastern policy. We fear what dark things the Saudis are repressing at home. The nation that gave us wahhabism and used it to police its deserts woukd like descend into chaos and sectarian strife if the pro-west Saudis walked or were pushed. Hence our support. It's like Russia in Syria. The Assad government is oppressive but it's better than civil war and a second long term Libya or Iraq.

 

The Arab Spring promised so much but has failed in almost all the places it sprang up except perhaps Morocco.

 

Maybe its to protect against terrorism.

Nah cant be or theyd have bombed the Saudis .

See above.

 

You might gauge success on good after dinner speakers i dont.

And if trumps your measure dont count me in.

I don't rate Trump in the slightest. A horrifying choice. If you were to pick a man so unworthy of the job it's him. A shister New York property dealer who's loud mouth, offensive, mysoginism has handed him the Oval Office. It's worrying he holds the nuclear football.

[niblick1874]

They are shitting it.

 

Why?

 

Americanism not globalism will be our credo.

 

We will drain the swamp.

 

Fake news, the Russians, Pied Piper, they hacked the election, the MSM, Black lives matter, the big bad white man, child raper backing celebrities, along with so much more, have not worked and most have backfired. Fingers crossed that's as bad as it gets.

 

I don't give a flying about his demeanor, his non politically correct stuff, the way he comes across sometimes as a non political person or that he might be blunt and non democratic to the Chines. Taxes? Once he is in (that's still not a given) I will, as well as millions of others. be holding his feet to the fire when it comes to draining the swamp and exposing the globalists for what they are and what they have done. That is all I can ask at the moment and if somehow he does get rid of the globalists and drains the swamp, hopefully there will be a democratic party there that doesn't do the bidding of monsters and can put forth and act on the true wishes of thoughtful caring understanding civilized human beings.

 

At the moment we have, around the world, Political systems put in place by people that encourage the use of pedophilia as well as other nasty out there stuff, as a bargaining and blackmailing tool to holed it all together and get what they want out of it. That includes America, the UK, the EU, so on and so forth. 

 

I'll take Trump and wait and see. To not do so would be ridiculous. When was the last time there was a chance (on the face of it) to get someone in that was not apart of a corrupt one party system such as we have all over the place. You can be sure that this chance won't be happening again anytime soon.

 

Am I going to get the conspiracy theory that he is just another that is in it for himself. Just another Clinton but there for the right? Fill your boots but their actions say different.

 

They tell us that he will be a dictator and turn America into a third world country. How about the American people that voted him President (There were millions upon millions remember, not a few thousand) be given a chance to find out. That is not what is happening and I fear the intention is to demonize, ridicule and delegitimize his right to the presidency and with the use of the MSM tell the believers that they have a right to take their country back. 

 

What is going on should be seen for what it is. This is not the flu that brexit has given them, Through their actions they are telling us that they see this as life threatening. A corrupt system that has been cooking for many years and getting to where they had a stranglehold are all of a sudden realizing how much won't work without power. On the outside and not able to looking in.         

 

 

 

 

As for Obama. It's very simple and there for all to see. He is a traitor not only to the American people but also to the rest of the world. He has proven that beyond a doubt. The proof is in the TTP and they can't make that go away.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

And your post in a nutshell is whats wrong with politics and the electorate.

 

You defined his success by saying hes a good actor and after dinner speaker.

 

Look UA im not trying to be the republican here but wrong is wrong.

 

Forgive me but i have at least 26,000 reasons for saying obama was the latest in a long line of presidents who were at the beckoned call of those with real power.

 

I wont be applauding him on anything.

 

No, I'm not defining success by that. I'm defining the dignity with which he held the office.  That's one virtue of many that a President should have. Success in the office is much bigger and that's a bigger discussion.

 

I would argue strongly that Obama was the least militant President since Carter.  You can say that's not good enough and I'll agree, but that's not about who was the one with "real power."  Obama's foreign policy was shaped by an attempt to extract the US from the role of absolute peacekeeper and protector of corrupt states in the Arab world and Persian Gulf in an orderly fashion.  He had limited success at that, and deserves to be judged on the philosophy he held as well as the successes and failures he had in implementing that philosophy.  As for me I don't fault him for trying to use the US's least invasive method -- targeted air power -- to try to knock back the self-styled Islamic State from executing massacres across Iraq and Syria.  But there's far more to that than a simple bomb tally.

[elvoys]

Pardon?

Benghazi response. Forgive the run on sentence.

[JamboX2]

They are shitting it.

 

Why?

 

Americanism not globalism will be our credo.

 

We will drain the swamp.

 

Fake news, the Russians, Pied Piper, they hacked the election, the MSM, Black lives matter, the big bad white man, child raper backing celebrities, along with so much more, have not worked and most have backfired. Fingers crossed that's as bad as it gets.

 

I don't give a flying about his demeanor, his non politically correct stuff, the way he comes across sometimes as a non political person or that he might be blunt and non democratic to the Chines. Taxes? Once he is in (that's still not a given) I will, as well as millions of others. be holding his feet to the fire when it comes to draining the swamp and exposing the globalists for what they are and what they have done. That is all I can ask at the moment and if somehow he does get rid of the globalists and drains the swamp, hopefully there will be a democratic party there that doesn't do the bidding of monsters and can put forth and act on the true wishes of thoughtful caring understanding civilized human beings.

 

At the moment we have, around the world, Political systems put in place by people that encourage the use of pedophilia as well as other nasty out there stuff, as a bargaining and blackmailing tool to holed it all together and get what they want out of it. That includes America, the UK, the EU, so on and so forth.

 

I'll take Trump and wait and see. To not do so would be ridiculous. When was the last time there was a chance (on the face of it) to get someone in that was not apart of a corrupt one party system such as we have all over the place. You can be sure that this chance won't be happening again anytime soon.

 

Am I going to get the conspiracy theory that he is just another that is in it for himself. Just another Clinton but there for the right? Fill your boots but their actions say different.

 

They tell us that he will be a dictator and turn America into a third world country. How about the American people that voted him President (There were millions upon millions remember, not a few thousand) be given a chance to find out. That is not what is happening and I fear the intention is to demonize, ridicule and delegitimize his right to the presidency and with the use of the MSM tell the believers that they have a right to take their country back.

 

What is going on should be seen for what it is. This is not the flu that brexit has given them, Through their actions they are telling us that they see this as life threatening. A corrupt system that has been cooking for many years and getting to where they had a stranglehold are all of a sudden realizing how much won't work without power. On the outside and not able to looking in.

 

 

 

 

As for Obama. It's very simple and there for all to see. He is a traitor not only to the American people but also to the rest of the world. He has proven that beyond a doubt. The proof is in the TTP and they can't make that go away.

You do realise based on his appointments to the White House Staff and his Cabinet that he is adding to not draining the swamp?

 

You do realise that globalisation is a further move forward in hunan progress as trade, economics, social and digital media all bring the world ever closer and erode the barriers between nations?

 

Why do you not care that he's a misogynist? Why do you not care about the message appointing guys like Bannon sends? That with gun crime soaring his proposals here seem outdated and backwards? That his views on abortion are terrifying? That his statements are contradictory and make no sense? That his approach to climate change may undermine the Paris Agreement and set us on a course to ecological catastrophe?

 

Yes he won the election. Yes he will be President. But that does not mean I or anyone else has to sit back and enjoy the ride.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

You do realise based on his appointments to the White House Staff and his Cabinet that he is adding to not draining the swamp?

 

You do realise that globalisation is a further move forward in hunan progress as trade, economics, social and digital media all bring the world ever closer and erode the barriers between nations?

 

Why do you not care that he's a misogynist? Why do you not care about the message appointing guys like Bannon sends? That with gun crime soaring his proposals here seem outdated and backwards? That his views on abortion are terrifying? That his statements are contradictory and make no sense? That his approach to climate change may undermine the Paris Agreement and set us on a course to ecological catastrophe?

 

Yes he won the election. Yes he will be President. But that does not mean I or anyone else has to sit back and enjoy the ride.

 

Logic and reason don't work here. You should know that by now.

[jake]

 

Logic and reason don't work here. You should know that by now.

 

So the logic of bumming up obama who has lied and created the biggest crisis with russia since cuba is reasonable?

 

Geoff i ask you to view the video i posted on the Syria thread.

[westbow]

Take it you typed that on your laptop.

Nope, on my phone whilst taking a jobby.

[Francis Albert]

You do realise based on his appointments to the White House Staff and his Cabinet that he is adding to not draining the swamp?

 

You do realise that globalisation is a further move forward in hunan progress as trade, economics, social and digital media all bring the world ever closer and erode the barriers between nations?

 

Why do you not care that he's a misogynist? Why do you not care about the message appointing guys like Bannon sends? That with gun crime soaring his proposals here seem outdated and backwards? That his views on abortion are terrifying? That his statements are contradictory and make no sense? That his approach to climate change may undermine the Paris Agreement and set us on a course to ecological catastrophe?

 

Yes he won the election. Yes he will be President. But that does not mean I or anyone else has to sit back and enjoy the ride.

The second sentence? Really? Unless "hunan progress" is a reference to some province in China enjoying rapid growth.

 

Globalisation is a replacement for the empires that we used to use to exploit people in other countries and  enables big corporations to avoid those pesky restrictions on child labour, pollution, health and safety, employment terms etc which impede them in the developed world.

 

And social and digital media is doing a geat job in bringing the muslim and non-muslim worlds together, to name but one source of conflict in which social and digital media is an increasingly potent weapon.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Francis Albert

[coconut doug]

You do realise that national interests have always included the interests of national trade and economics? Us, the Germans, the French, the Americans, Chinese, Japanese and so on and so forth as far back as the Romans have made military decisions not just on who attacks you but what protects your interests. Read up on Biafra for a great example of how economics and war and national interest is mixed.

 

Can you be dignified and bomb people? Given you are conflating two things which were unrelated in this discussion before - yes you can. As UA says in carrying out his duties Obama has spoke better and carried himself (and his policies at home and abroad) than his predecessor and will have done so more than his successor.

 

The USA is operating on a militaryscale globally like no other before it. But do you think a man who actively called on in the election to target the families of terrorists or ISIS fighters a sound and competent human being to carry out the role of Commander in Chief?

 

Obama has escalated drone warfare in an attempt to get American boots off the ground in the middle east. What good it does I don't know. But for every American drone bomb we've had this year we've also had Turkish and Russian amd Syrian ones (and Iranian). So I don't know nor get why we make a special example of western nations.

 

What about Russian actions in Syria?

What about us and France?

What about Saudis in Yemen?

 

 

It's the paradox of middle eastern policy. We fear what dark things the Saudis are repressing at home. The nation that gave us wahhabism and used it to police its deserts woukd like descend into chaos and sectarian strife if the pro-west Saudis walked or were pushed. Hence our support. It's like Russia in Syria. The Assad government is oppressive but it's better than civil war and a second long term Libya or Iraq.

 

The Arab Spring promised so much but has failed in almost all the places it sprang up except perhaps Morocco.

 

 

See above.

 

 

I don't rate Trump in the slightest. A horrifying choice. If you were to pick a man so unworthy of the job it's him. A shister New York property dealer who's loud mouth, offensive, mysoginism has handed him the Oval Office. It's worrying he holds the nuclear football.

The Assad regime is nothing like the Saudi regime, especially in terms of oppression and brutality. Assad's crime was to loosen ties with the west, same as Gaddaffi.

 

The Russians in Syria are not as portrayed by the west perhaps you should watch the video linked by Jake in the Syria thread.

 

The Arab spring is a U.S. manufacture and a vehicle for violent aggression.

[JamboX2]

The second sentence? Really? Unless "hunan progress" is a reference to some province in China enjoying rapid growth.

 

Sorry should be Human. However, globalisation is broader than trade deficits. Do you think issues around China dumping steel on the global market will be changed by our retreat from Europe, a bigger bloc to bargain with or not?

 

Globalisation is a replacement for the empires that we used to use to exploit people in other countries and enables big corporations to avoid those pesky restrictions on child labour, pollution, health and safety, employment terms etc which impede them in the developed world.

 

But surely these abuses will continue regardless? Again, does engaging with the globalised workd to stop this by working with other like minded people do more or less than retreat from it?

 

And social and digital media is doing a geat job in bringing the muslim and non-muslim worlds together, to name but one source of conflict in which social and digital media is an increasingly potent weapon.

A lot of that again has to do with a failure of foresight and poor choices by Western Leaders than anything else.

[JamboX2]

The Assad regime is nothing like the Saudi regime, especially in terms of oppression and brutality. Assad's crime was to loosen ties with the west, same as Gaddaffi.

His use of force on his people is sonething which looks repressive.

 

Personally, Assad is the better of two evils. Lawlessness or him. I agree Western involvement to back Free Syrian Army leaders and troops was an act of sheer folly. But, Assads government's actions in Aleppo are pretty diabolical.

 

The Russians in Syria are not as portrayed by the west perhaps you should watch the video linked by Jake in the Syria thread.

 

Are you telling me Syrian state media does not portray Russian assistance in Syria to Assad as bad? I refer you to the period between 1941 and 1945 and good old uncle joe.

 

The Arab spring is a U.S. manufacture and a vehicle for violent aggression.

So those popular demonstrations in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Morrocco and Tunisia didn't happen? Or were Western Manufactured? Bearing in mind we were pally with Ghaddafi and the Egyptian and Tunisian leadership up till then.

[JamboX2]

 

Logic and reason don't work here. You should know that by now.

Sorry GK. Couldn't help it....

[Maple Leaf]

They are shitting it.

 

Why?

 

Americanism not globalism will be our credo.

 

We will drain the swamp.

 

Fake news, the Russians, Pied Piper, they hacked the election, the MSM, Black lives matter, the big bad white man, child raper backing celebrities, along with so much more, have not worked and most have backfired. Fingers crossed that's as bad as it gets.

 

I don't give a flying about his demeanor, his non politically correct stuff, the way he comes across sometimes as a non political person or that he might be blunt and non democratic to the Chines. Taxes? Once he is in (that's still not a given) I will, as well as millions of others. be holding his feet to the fire when it comes to draining the swamp and exposing the globalists for what they are and what they have done. That is all I can ask at the moment and if somehow he does get rid of the globalists and drains the swamp, hopefully there will be a democratic party there that doesn't do the bidding of monsters and can put forth and act on the true wishes of thoughtful caring understanding civilized human beings.

 

At the moment we have, around the world, Political systems put in place by people that encourage the use of pedophilia as well as other nasty out there stuff, as a bargaining and blackmailing tool to holed it all together and get what they want out of it. That includes America, the UK, the EU, so on and so forth. 

 

I'll take Trump and wait and see. To not do so would be ridiculous. When was the last time there was a chance (on the face of it) to get someone in that was not apart of a corrupt one party system such as we have all over the place. You can be sure that this chance won't be happening again anytime soon.

 

Am I going to get the conspiracy theory that he is just another that is in it for himself. Just another Clinton but there for the right? Fill your boots but their actions say different.

 

They tell us that he will be a dictator and turn America into a third world country. How about the American people that voted him President (There were millions upon millions remember, not a few thousand) be given a chance to find out. That is not what is happening and I fear the intention is to demonize, ridicule and delegitimize his right to the presidency and with the use of the MSM tell the believers that they have a right to take their country back. 

 

What is going on should be seen for what it is. This is not the flu that brexit has given them, Through their actions they are telling us that they see this as life threatening. A corrupt system that has been cooking for many years and getting to where they had a stranglehold are all of a sudden realizing how much won't work without power. On the outside and not able to looking in.         

 

 

 

 

As for Obama. It's very simple and there for all to see. He is a traitor not only to the American people but also to the rest of the world. He has proven that beyond a doubt. The proof is in the TTP and they can't make that go away.

Before the election, you are on record in this thread as saying that you didn't care who won the election.  Now you have clearly jumped aboard the Trump bandwagon.  If you think that he's really going to drain the swamp, I'll have some of what you're smoking.

 

And I'm looking forward to you, a Canadian resident, "holding his feet to the fire" if Trump doesn't live up to his election promises.  How do you propose to do that?  You must realise that that is empty rhetoric.  You have zero clout in the USA.

[Francis Albert]

One huge positive of Trump's election is the end of the insane talk of imposing sanctions on Russia or even trying to impose a no-fly zone over Aleppo. The choice in Syria is indeed between evils but between Assad and ISIS there is only one right answer, and Putin has called it absolutely right. Yes civilians have been and are being killed and wounded,including children and hospital patients, just as they have in the wars conducted by the West in the Middle East and North Africa in the past two decades and more. American politicians calling for Trump and his nominees to declare Putin a war criminal (as well as being as stupid as anything Trump has ever said) is the height of hypocrisy, sadly a seemingly increasingly ingrained American trait. In fact hypocrisy and double standards has been a mainstay of the USA since it was formed.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Francis Albert

[Francis Albert]

Sorry should be Human. However, globalisation is broader than trade deficits. Do you think issues around China dumping steel on the global market will be changed by our retreat from Europe, a bigger bloc to bargain with or not?

 

 

But surely these abuses will continue regardless? Again, does engaging with the globalised workd to stop this by working with other like minded people do more or less than retreat from it?

 

 

A lot of that again has to do with a failure of foresight and poor choices by Western Leaders than anything else.

But globalisation isn't about addressing or combating the abuses I described. It is in practice about enabling them.

And I am not sure how poor choices by Western leaders have made social and digital media such a potent weapon for ISIS. You can argue that the West's policy can be blamed for ISIS (although I would dispute that strongly, except as one relatively minor contributing factor) but I don't see the case for social and digital media bringing people together and fostering good will among mankind. It seems to me to do pretty much the opposite and to degrade political thought and process, as demonstrated daily.

[Sidelight]

You do realise that globalisation is a further move forward in human progress as trade, economics, social and digital media all bring the world ever closer and erode the barriers between nations?

 

Perhaps the most punishing and disturbing sentence I have ever read in the annals of KB.

However I am sure you will find consensus from America to the plains of Megiddo.

Edited January 12, 2017 by alfajambo

[Watt-Zeefuik]

 

Perhaps the most punishing and disturbing sentence I have ever read in the annals of KB.

However I am sure you will find consensus from America to the plains of Megiddo.

 

 

There is certainly an element of globalization that is anti-nationalist, which I can get behind.

 

I think it's the wrong solution to nationalism, and think internationalism tends to empower the already powerful and further the problems of colonialism, but it's a fairly understandable reaction to the horrors of the hypernationalism of the early to mid-20th century.

[Space Mackerel]

I'll remember not to buy fresh chillis grown in Kenya as my first step against this dreaded globalisation

Edited January 12, 2017 by Space Mackerel

[Craig Gordons Gloves]

It appears that there is some support for Trump on here and I would expect that given that we live in a free world and people are free to have their own opinions.

 

Just for a minute though, let's take away Obama and his successes and failures and let's look at the incoming president.  

 

He has refused to release his tax returns.  These tax returns would show his liabilities, his partnerships, his tax payments (or lack thereof).  If, as he says, he has nothing to hide, why not release them? Could it be because a) he's worth nowhere near as much as he claims, b ) he is in hock to many institutions c) he has ties in business to businesses that don't operate in a US friendly manner.  His clothing line is made in China ffs.

 

He has refused to divest himself of his business, instead he's turning over the reigns to his 2 sons.  In that, he's said that there won't be any foreign deals done and any income from foreign governments will be handed over to the treasury.  He'll also have an in house ethics counsel, appointed by himself to ensure that everything is above board.  The non-partisan office of government ethics has said this is nowhere near enough.  Don't let's forget that he's made his money through deals and financing from various institutions.  How likely is it that he would enact anything that could harm is business in any way even if it was for the greater good.

 

He consistently contradicts himself.  He speaks in incoherent soundbites, often using the words "great", "the best" and repeating them at least twice while having absolutely zero substance to what he says.  I've watched his press conference twice now and he's coming across as genuinely clueless.  He's not one for details, instead prefering to talk in headlines.

 

Twitter - seriously, if your boss at your work took to twitter to abuse people all the time that worked in a different company, or just anyone in general - how would you view them? I'd be hoping that someone would have a word and have them grow up.

 

Finally - he's petulant, think skinned, a bully and cannot take criticism of himself in any way but is incredibly happy giving it out.

 

Now - if that's what you what for the President of the US then that's your right - personally, i'm ****in terrified of the next 4 years and what could happen.

 

Bringing Obama back in now - i've lived here for the last 2 years of GWB and the full 8 years of Obama.  Many 'regular' people will happily admit that things are better - as a whole - than they have been.  They may disagree with him on politics but they also admit that he's not a worry.  That's what you need as President, someone that doesn't create worry and Trump creates a massive amount of worry - even amongst those i've spoken to that voted for him.

[jake]

It appears that there is some support for Trump on here and I would expect that given that we live in a free world and people are free to have their own opinions.

 

Just for a minute though, let's take away Obama and his successes and failures and let's look at the incoming president.

 

He has refused to release his tax returns. These tax returns would show his liabilities, his partnerships, his tax payments (or lack thereof). If, as he says, he has nothing to hide, why not release them? Could it be because a) he's worth nowhere near as much as he claims, b ) he is in hock to many institutions c) he has ties in business to businesses that don't operate in a US friendly manner. His clothing line is made in China ffs.

 

He has refused to divest himself of his business, instead he's turning over the reigns to his 2 sons. In that, he's said that there won't be any foreign deals done and any income from foreign governments will be handed over to the treasury. He'll also have an in house ethics counsel, appointed by himself to ensure that everything is above board. The non-partisan office of government ethics has said this is nowhere near enough. Don't let's forget that he's made his money through deals and financing from various institutions. How likely is it that he would enact anything that could harm is business in any way even if it was for the greater good.

 

He consistently contradicts himself. He speaks in incoherent soundbites, often using the words "great", "the best" and repeating them at least twice while having absolutely zero substance to what he says. I've watched his press conference twice now and he's coming across as genuinely clueless. He's not one for details, instead prefering to talk in headlines.

 

Twitter - seriously, if your boss at your work took to twitter to abuse people all the time that worked in a different company, or just anyone in general - how would you view them? I'd be hoping that someone would have a word and have them grow up.

 

Finally - he's petulant, think skinned, a bully and cannot take criticism of himself in any way but is incredibly happy giving it out.

 

Now - if that's what you what for the President of the US then that's your right - personally, i'm ****** terrified of the next 4 years and what could happen.

 

Bringing Obama back in now - i've lived here for the last 2 years of GWB and the full 8 years of Obama. Many 'regular' people will happily admit that things are better - as a whole - than they have been. They may disagree with him on politics but they also admit that he's not a worry. That's what you need as President, someone that doesn't create worry and Trump creates a massive amount of worry - even amongst those i've spoken to that voted for him.

 

So the massive miltary deployment from obama in his last weeks as president in and around the Syrian conflict.

(Its not a civil war btw) is not a major worry ?

 

Nor the lies about what actually has and is happening.

Beggars belief that you were not worried before.

 

Must just be Syrians that worry about a conflict he created.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

So the massive miltary deployment from obama in his last weeks as president in and around the Syrian conflict.

(Its not a civil war btw) is not a major worry ?

 

Nor the lies about what actually has and is happening.

Beggars belief that you were not worried before.

 

Must just be Syrians that worry about a conflict he created.

 

We can disagree on everything else but this is just wretchedly wrong and slanderous.  Obama did not create the conflict in Syria.  It is a product of a) the instability created by the invasion of Iraq and the botched occupation, particularly the disbanding of the Iraqi army, b ) the emersion of the Arab Spring revolts, which targeted Assad among other authoritarian regimes, and c) Putin's propping up of Assad who otherwise would have gone the way of Qaddafi. 

 

To say that Obama created this conflict is just enormously wrong.  You can say he's mismanaged the US's involvement in it -- that's a debatable point, but he did not create it.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Sorry GK. Couldn't help it....

 

Waiting for niblick to realize that Trump's Sec. of State nominee has said he won't oppose the TPP.

[Space Mackerel]

We can disagree on everything else but this is just wretchedly wrong and slanderous.  Obama did not create the conflict in Syria.  It is a product of a) the instability created by the invasion of Iraq and the botched occupation, particularly the disbanding of the Iraqi army, the emersion of the Arab Spring revolts, which targeted Assad among other authoritarian regimes, and c) Putin's propping up of Assad who otherwise would have gone the way of Qaddafi. 

 

To say that Obama created this conflict is just enormously wrong.  You can say he's mismanaged the US's involvement in it -- that's a debatable point, but he did not create it.

Correct. The Bush's, 1 and 2, along with T Blair were responsible for the current chaos in and around the Middle East.

[Ulysses]

I will, as well as millions of others. be holding his feet to the fire

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Waiting for niblick to realize that Trump's Sec. of State nominee has said he won't oppose the TPP.

 

But Trump said he was going to rip up all the trade deals, mind Trump's said many things, most of which he'll never do, either by design or because he can't.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

But Trump said he was going to rip up all the trade deals, mind Trump's said many things, most of which he'll never do, either by design or because he can't.

 

The TPP isn't ratified, so he doesn't need to rip it up.  He consistently criticized Clinton on the campaign trail for her support for it early in the process.

 

More to the point, niblick has been obsessed with it without understanding what it was or what it did.  I think it was a bad solution to a real problem (trying to limit the hegemony of an authoritarian Chinese government in Pacific Asia) but it's going to be far from the worst thing that Tillerson does if he's confirmed at State.

[JamboX2]

But globalisation isn't about addressing or combating the abuses I described. It is in practice about enabling them.

It can be. Internationalism and globalisation isn't in itself bad. It needs better regulation and more interstate cooperation. The EU is a great example of that. Better able to coordinate taking action on a lot of the issues you're talking about.

 

And I am not sure how poor choices by Western leaders have made social and digital media such a potent weapon for ISIS. You can argue that the West's policy can be blamed for ISIS (although I would dispute that strongly, except as one relatively minor contributing factor) but I don't see the case for social and digital media bringing people together and fostering good will among mankind. It seems to me to do pretty much the opposite and to degrade political thought and process, as demonstrated daily.

It does have those elements. The phone killed the art of letter writing. TV changed politics forever. The internet has allowed instant global communication cheaply. It's allowed the greatest opening up of information to the world ever.

 

Equally it diminishes politics. Much like TV did. It creates echo chambers of opinion. It allows for the rise and growth of unsubstantiated rumours. It allows for ease to abuse and slander anonymously.

 

On ISIS and the middle east, the mass advent of broadband happened after 9/11. Of mobile wireless on a grand scale. That period coincides with the west causing a power vacuum in Iraq and regular and increasingly easy to share footage of Western actions there. That's perhaps a thing which could be used as a good. Much like the footage and photographs of the goings on in Vietnam helped contribute to a global opposition to the war.

 

It's a two way street.

[Craig Gordons Gloves]

So the massive miltary deployment from obama in his last weeks as president in and around the Syrian conflict.

(Its not a civil war btw) is not a major worry ?

 

Nor the lies about what actually has and is happening.

Beggars belief that you were not worried before.

 

Must just be Syrians that worry about a conflict he created.

 

 

Jake my man, you're continously talking about the same thing.  At no point did i say that Obama was president perfect and as has been pointed out, Obama didn't create the conflict.  Also, given his 'policy' pronouncements, it seems far more likely that Trump will be dropping a lot more bombs than Obama. Remember, he's going to defeat ISIS don't you know, do you think he'll do that with flowers and sweet music?  He'll more likely be responsible for more deaths - be it by bombing or troops on the ground.

[jake]

We can disagree on everything else but this is just wretchedly wrong and slanderous. Obama did not create the conflict in Syria. It is a product of a) the instability created by the invasion of Iraq and the botched occupation, particularly the disbanding of the Iraqi army, b ) the emersion of the Arab Spring revolts, which targeted Assad among other authoritarian regimes, and c) Putin's propping up of Assad who otherwise would have gone the way of Qaddafi.

 

To say that Obama created this conflict is just enormously wrong. You can say he's mismanaged the US's involvement in it -- that's a debatable point, but he did not create it.

 

He is the leader of the sorry was the leader of the USA.

The Syrian conflict was caused by the USA.

 

It may well be the continuation of its geo political strategy that it has for over 100 years practiced but he as leader of the USA is responsible for the last 8 ye

[jake]

Ignored was coconut dougs post.

Tthe reason obamas miltary are involved in Syria is because of oil.

 

Hes left Trump with the biggest confrontation since Cuba.

 

He knows the truth yet does or has done nothing.

 

Please watch the video posted on the syria thread.

 

 

Obama has the blood of Syrian people on his hands with his lies and policies.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

He is the leader of the sorry was the leader of the USA.

The Syrian conflict was caused by the USA.

 

It may well be the continuation of its geo political strategy that it has for over 100 years practiced but he as leader of the USA is responsible for the last 8 ye

 

Sorry but this is just nonsense.  Obama radically changed the US's geopolitical strategy in the region from the previous administration.  And while the US is undoubtedly the dominant power in the world we don't control everything.  The US didn't cause the Arab Spring.  The US didn't make Russia prop up Assad.  The main way that the US caused the conflict is via a series of decisions that Obama vocally opposed as they were happening.  His nomination and election were driven by his promise to change that policy, which he did.

 

 

Ignored was coconut dougs post.

Tthe reason obamas miltary are involved in Syria is because of oil.

 

Hes left Trump with the biggest confrontation since Cuba.

 

He knows the truth yet does or has done nothing.

 

Please watch the video posted on the syria thread.

 

 

Obama has the blood of Syrian people on his hands with his lies and policies.

 

Again, sorry this is complete nonsense.  Syria is not the "biggest confrontation since Cuba."  I don't even know what you mean by "Cuba" -- the missile crisis?  We've had massive confrontations since then.  Both Iraq and Afghanistan were, by any measure, far bigger conflicts than Syria or than any confrontation with Cuba.

 

As to coconut doug, he claimed the Arab Spring is a Western intervention.  Which is particularly insulting to the people who actually organized and carried out the uprisings, as well as ignoring the fact that the Arab Spring led to temporary regime change in Egypt that the US opposed and ultimately helped reverse by isolating Morsi.  The Arab Spring acted against Western interests as much as it acted for them, because the Arab world has its own interests that are independent of the West.

[Francis Albert]

It can be. Internationalism and globalisation isn't in itself bad. It needs better regulation and more interstate cooperation. The EU is a great example of that. Better able to coordinate taking action on a lot of the issues you're talking about.

I can't buy that EU is a great example. You do know that Jean-Claude Juncker's career was built on making Luxembourg a tax haven where global companies can hide profits and avoid tax on a massive scale. Since Juncker was rewarded for his achievements with the Presidency of the EU Commission, several attempts have been made by members to fix that, but it requires unanimous approval of all the EU member states. Luxembourg has exercised its veto on each occasion to block the proposals.

 

Presumably for Luxembourg the free movement of company tax liabilities is another fundamental right!

Edited January 12, 2017 by Francis Albert

[Space Mackerel]

Sorry but this is just nonsense.  Obama radically changed the US's geopolitical strategy in the region from the previous administration.  And while the US is undoubtedly the dominant power in the world we don't control everything.  The US didn't cause the Arab Spring.  The US didn't make Russia prop up Assad.  The main way that the US caused the conflict is via a series of decisions that Obama vocally opposed as they were happening.  His nomination and election were driven by his promise to change that policy, which he did.

 

 

 

 

Again, sorry this is complete nonsense.  Syria is not the "biggest confrontation since Cuba."  I don't even know what you mean by "Cuba" -- the missile crisis?  We've had massive confrontations since then.  Both Iraq and Afghanistan were, by any measure, far bigger conflicts than Syria or than any confrontation with Cuba.

 

As to coconut doug, he claimed the Arab Spring is a Western intervention.  Which is particularly insulting to the people who actually organized and carried out the uprisings, as well as ignoring the fact that the Arab Spring led to temporary regime change in Egypt that the US opposed and ultimately helped reverse by isolating Morsi.  The Arab Spring acted against Western interests as much as it acted for them, because the Arab world has its own interests that are independent of the West.

Cmon UA, NATO had no fly zones and Special Forces in Tunisia and Libya before a shot was fired.

[jake]

Sorry but this is just nonsense. Obama radically changed the US's geopolitical strategy in the region from the previous administration. And while the US is undoubtedly the dominant power in the world we don't control everything. The US didn't cause the Arab Spring. The US didn't make Russia prop up Assad. The main way that the US caused the conflict is via a series of decisions that Obama vocally opposed as they were happening. His nomination and election were driven by his promise to change that policy, which he did.

 

 

 

Again, sorry this is complete nonsense. Syria is not the "biggest confrontation since Cuba." I don't even know what you mean by "Cuba" -- the missile crisis? We've had massive confrontations since then. Both Iraq and Afghanistan were, by any measure, far bigger conflicts than Syria or than any confrontation with Cuba.

 

As to coconut doug, he claimed the Arab Spring is a Western intervention. Which is particularly insulting to the people who actually organized and carried out the uprisings, as well as ignoring the fact that the Arab Spring led to temporary regime change in Egypt that the US opposed and ultimately helped reverse by isolating Morsi. The Arab Spring acted against Western interests as much as it acted for them, because the Arab world has its own interests that are independent of the West.

UA.

Go back 100 years.

The US invented fake news.

Please look up the american spanish war over white gold(sugar).The arab spring is an insult alright.

An insult to the relative peace and security of Libya.

Regime change the all forgiving excuse to bomb people.

Yes the arab nations interests are suited to obamas or his secretary of state .

Saudi Arabias.

 

Come on UA open your eyes ffs.

 

Just because Putin and whoever are bad makes them no worse.

 

Look when obama won his first election i thought it was at last some kind of reconcile for the atrocities suffered by black americans.

 

I WILL NOT EXCUSE HIS CRIMES BECAUSE OF THAT.

You are now qualifying those as not as bad as iraq or Afghanistan.

 

The syrian conflict is young .

 

 

 

 

Your a good guy UA.

Obama is just another career politician .

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Cmon UA, NATO had no fly zones and Special Forces in Tunisia and Libya before a shot was fired.

 

Again, nonsense. There was a full-scale revolt on by mid-February.  The no-fly zone wasn't approved or implemented for another month during which Qaddafi was bombing demonstrators. 

[Space Mackerel]

Again, nonsense. There was a full-scale revolt on by mid-February.  The no-fly zone wasn't approved or implemented for another month during which Qaddafi was bombing demonstrators.

 

I know when the SF went in, my mate flew them in a Herc to meet up with the rebels. Actually, it was the next day as the ****ed up the LZ the first time

[Watt-Zeefuik]

UA.

Go back 100 years.

The US invented fake news.

Please look up the american spanish war over white gold(sugar).The arab spring is an insult alright.

An insult to the relative peace and security of Libya.

Regime change the all forgiving excuse to bomb people.

Yes the arab nations interests are suited to obamas or his secretary of state .

Saudi Arabias.

 

Come on UA open your eyes ffs.

 

Just because Putin and whoever are bad makes them no worse.

 

Look when obama won his first election i thought it was at last some kind of reconcile for the atrocities suffered by black americans.

 

I WILL NOT EXCUSE HIS CRIMES BECAUSE OF THAT.

You are now qualifying those as not as bad as iraq or Afghanistan.

 

The syrian conflict is young .

 

 

 

 

Your a good guy UA.

Obama is just another career politician .

 

I will own my country's responsibilities if you will own yours.

 

Long before the US was a country British colonialism was meddling around the world.  "Fake news an American invention?"  You must be joking! Propaganda is as old as government itself!  Does nobody read Machiavelli anymore?

 

While the US has destabilized governments around the world for decades, I categorically reject and denounce this notion that the US is the sole source of authoritarianism, or that Putin is "no worse."  I encounter this garbage on the left constantly and it drives me batty.  Removing the US's influence from world politics would not lead to total peace and security -- that is a daft essentialism of the worst sort.  I am sure those tortured in Qaddafi's underground prisons would love to hear about Libya's "peace and security."

 

You mention Saudi Arabia -- use your brain.  The Arab Spring overthrew multiple allies of the Saudi regime.  And again, another of the US's closest allies was Hosni Mubarak, who was overthrown by Egypt's Tahrir Square uprising.  

 

International politics are complicated -- they do not all resolve to pro-US or anti-US. It is a particular kind of laziness on either side to just see which side the US picks before supporting or opposing an action.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

I know when the SF went in, my mate flew them in a Herc to meet up with the rebels. Actually, it was the next day as the ****ed up the LZ the first time

 

No question that in Libya, the US (and allies like the UK) rushed in to support them. That doesn't make the AS an American fabrication.

[jake]

I will own my country's responsibilities if you will own yours.

 

Long before the US was a country British colonialism was meddling around the world. "Fake news an American invention?" You must be joking! Propaganda is as old as government itself! Does nobody read Machiavelli anymore?

 

While the US has destabilized governments around the world for decades, I categorically reject and denounce this notion that the US is the sole source of authoritarianism, or that Putin is "no worse." I encounter this garbage on the left constantly and it drives me batty. Removing the US's influence from world politics would not lead to total peace and security -- that is a daft essentialism of the worst sort. I am sure those tortured in Qaddafi's underground prisons would love to hear about Libya's "peace and security."

 

You mention Saudi Arabia -- use your brain. The Arab Spring overthrew multiple allies of the Saudi regime. And again, another of the US's closest allies was Hosni Mubarak, who was overthrown by Egypt's Tahrir Square uprising.

 

International politics are complicated -- they do not all resolve to pro-US or anti-US. It is a particular kind of laziness on either side to just see which side the US picks before supporting or opposing an action.

 

I do not support or condone any country or organistion which uses violence against the poor.

I do not justify any action which benefits one nationality against those of another.

Especially the poorer nationality.

 

Which is it UA .

Is it nation against nation your defending?

Is it obamas worse than putin?

Facts suggest otherwise actually.

Is it obama versus trump facts so farsay obama is worse but ive no doubt that trump like generations of amwrican presidents will be governed by those who can make or break him.

[Space Mackerel]

No question that in Libya, the US (and allies like the UK) rushed in to support them. That doesn't make the AS an American fabrication.

Here's a link from the NY Times that says otherwise. You've always got to follow the money

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/world/15aid.html

[jake]

Not sure if i explained why i quoted the american spanish war over cuban sugar UA.

 

It was in relation to the propaganda used to hoodwink the public into war.

 

The spanish were a fading empire with wooden boats that didnt want war.

 

A modern steel ammerican warship docked in a cuban port.

Unannounced it was still granted havenship.

Despite the political news reports of spanish atrocities against children in hospitals which didnt exist(ring any bells)

Guess what the ship waz victim of a terrorist type attack.

 

The wooden spanish fleet blown to pieces resulted in american control of sugar.

 

 

The tactics i grant you the same but there is a difference.

 

Media.

And its only got more sophisticated.

100 years of practice.

[Sidelight]

There is certainly an element of globalization that is anti-nationalist, which I can get behind.

 

I think it's the wrong solution to nationalism, and think internationalism tends to empower the already powerful and further the problems of colonialism, but it's a fairly understandable reaction to the horrors of the hypernationalism of the early to mid-20th century.

 

 

In many ways I agree with your opening shot, however finding the balance between national independence and large scale centralised governmental control with its perceived advantages is synonymous with difficult.

Arguments used to define the vision of globalisation such as the standard response of liberalisation and integration of global financial markets, and that somehow it furthers the linear spread of democracy across the globe now seem very weak.

Recent events on both sides of the Atlantic suggest that people are starting to refute the arguments, becoming more uncomfortable and alarmed at the increasing centralisation and outing of power.

The seemingly uncontrolled levels of Muslim immigration to the west provide only a part of the narrative for this paradigm shift. Some on the receiving end of this rising tide perceive Islam both religion and ideology as a legitimate threat, and at times this is true. But more often we see that Muslims are neither religion nor ideology, but rather individuals desperately in need of a saviour, individuals  for who Christ died, according to the Christian faith.

As for me my worldview is read through the eschatological biblical narrative leading to the return of Christ, hence my suspicion of perceived globalisation.

 

 

 

[Ulysses]

Sorry but this is just nonsense. 

 

UA, you're kinda missing the point.  For as long as I've had an interest in politics, there has always been a percentage of people who are anti-American, and that's what you're seeing from the likes of jake.  Some of it is just what it says on the tin - Anti-Americanism for its own sake.  Some of it is a distaste for American foreign policy (although for the most part that's an excuse), and some of it is just deluded communist nonsense.  But whatever it is, it doesn't matter; there's no point in trying to argue with specifics because they're not listening.

[jake]

UA, you're kinda missing the point. For as long as I've had an interest in politics, there has always been a percentage of people who are anti-American, and that's what you're seeing from the likes of jake. Some of it is just what it says on the tin - Anti-Americanism for its own sake. Some of it is a distaste for American foreign policy (although for the most part that's an excuse), and some of it is just deluded communist nonsense. But whatever it is, it doesn't matter; there's no point in trying to argue with specifics because they're not listening.

 

What nonsense.

 

One minute im anti muslim then im anti european now im anti american.

 

No answer to the clues of history repeating itself.

 

Anti american.

No.

 

Are you actually suggesting that the Syrian conflict is a civil war of its own making.

 

Maybe you should look at every conflict america has been involved in.

Check the narrative.

 

Oh by the way check any empire its no different.

 

Please try to argue the points without trying to imply that those who see things differently are bigots or racists.

 

Most of us dont define by colour or race anymore but by whats wrong and whats right.

 

But i forgot you are a moderator so we must be careful.

 

Have you viewed the link i posted on the thread titled Syria.

 

Or am i just a bigoted trump supporter .

Anti islam anti eu anti american.

 

A small minded bigot who doesnt believe your truth.

 

Shame on you all .