The Trump Era (Jan 20, 2017 – XXXX) Political Discussion Including Foreign Impacts

1141517192026

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,696
    bondjames wrote: »


    Bottom line: Russia has indicated clearly that it wants to be respected and dealt with as an equal partner with its own interests in global affairs. Turkey has done the same. Iran has done the same. This does not sit well with the old concept of Western hegemony & Pax Americana, and that is precisely where all this conflict is coming from. We're either going to have to find a new way of working with these countries with shared interests, or we are going to have increased conflict. We are not going to be able to dominate them or dictate to them as in the past.

    Wow. Increased respect here.
  • bondjames wrote:
    Anyway, I think the following stuff is important for everyone to read. Not the crap that you find on the internet. But good, insightful, investigative, neutral journalism. The three articles are long. And most likely most of the forummembers in here don't even dare to read this, because it's simply too lengthy stuff. Which is sad though, because everyone in here ought to read this..

    Thanks for posting. However, I hope you're not suggesting that members of this forum don't have the aptitude to read an Economist article. Some of us, myself included, have been subscribers since our University days. I read that article when it came out. There are some useful facts there, but little of it is new to me. People should be aware that the Economist is an excellent source of information on world affairs that is published weekly. However, viewers must keep in mind that it is opinionated, since they take a point of view on the subjects that they report on. They are not always right, despite always having very informative articles backed up by facts, so take their opinion with a grain of salt. As just one example, I recall them advocating heavily for the Iraq War with lots of facts to back it up, and they regret that to this day.
    Once you have read it, you should be damn sceptical about Russia, about 'Putinism', and Putin's true intentions. I don't want to fear people, but these articles gave me a very uncomfortable feeling about the prospect that Russia will start dictating politics in Europe and the USA. Frankly, it frightens me.
    You'll forgive me for thinking that you are indeed trying to scare people since you use the word 'frighten' multiple times on nearly every political thread for some reason. Perhaps you are easily frightened, and then it's understandable. Anyway, the article doesn't scare me. Mr. Putin is a proud Russian nationalist, and he is doing what he feels is right for his nation, as any leader should. Russia has been fighting an 'economic' war, an 'information' war, a 'currency' war, and a 'cyber' war with the US since he returned as President in 2012, and most clearly since 2014. Russia has been under US and EU sanctions on account of Crimea, so it's not surprising that he's beefing up the FSB and consolidating control, as he believes the West is trying to undermine him. That behaviour will continue as long as we have a hostile relationship with him - if the West wants a cornered Russian Bear, then that is what it will get.

    The oil price collapse over the last few years was no accident - it was designed to hurt Russia as much as the shale oil producers in the US & the Canadian tar sands. Notice how OPEC was suddenly able to strike a deal after the US elections, despite being unable to do so for years. The oil price has started to rise, which will benefit Russia. There's a new paradigm coming, and countries know it.


    You're so smart in your answers dear @BondJames. Very long answers, without actually agreeing on one tiny bit of argument from three very long insightful articles. You start praising The Economist for being a good source, for students no less. But there it already stops. Because during that entire post there's not one tiny bit of a self-admitting sentence like "Hmm, that's actually true. I should have highlighted that!"

    So you're calling the kettle black, because you're opiniones as well. And frankly, there's no self-criticism or self-correction in your posts either. So one could say I posted these articles for nothing, since most people in here, and especially you, are not responding to the actual contents of these articles. So there you have it. You actually don't care at all about The 'opiniate' Economist. For you it seems like a relic from good old student times.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote:
    Anyway, I think the following stuff is important for everyone to read. Not the crap that you find on the internet. But good, insightful, investigative, neutral journalism. The three articles are long. And most likely most of the forummembers in here don't even dare to read this, because it's simply too lengthy stuff. Which is sad though, because everyone in here ought to read this..

    Thanks for posting. However, I hope you're not suggesting that members of this forum don't have the aptitude to read an Economist article. Some of us, myself included, have been subscribers since our University days. I read that article when it came out. There are some useful facts there, but little of it is new to me. People should be aware that the Economist is an excellent source of information on world affairs that is published weekly. However, viewers must keep in mind that it is opinionated, since they take a point of view on the subjects that they report on. They are not always right, despite always having very informative articles backed up by facts, so take their opinion with a grain of salt. As just one example, I recall them advocating heavily for the Iraq War with lots of facts to back it up, and they regret that to this day.
    Once you have read it, you should be damn sceptical about Russia, about 'Putinism', and Putin's true intentions. I don't want to fear people, but these articles gave me a very uncomfortable feeling about the prospect that Russia will start dictating politics in Europe and the USA. Frankly, it frightens me.
    You'll forgive me for thinking that you are indeed trying to scare people since you use the word 'frighten' multiple times on nearly every political thread for some reason. Perhaps you are easily frightened, and then it's understandable. Anyway, the article doesn't scare me. Mr. Putin is a proud Russian nationalist, and he is doing what he feels is right for his nation, as any leader should. Russia has been fighting an 'economic' war, an 'information' war, a 'currency' war, and a 'cyber' war with the US since he returned as President in 2012, and most clearly since 2014. Russia has been under US and EU sanctions on account of Crimea, so it's not surprising that he's beefing up the FSB and consolidating control, as he believes the West is trying to undermine him. That behaviour will continue as long as we have a hostile relationship with him - if the West wants a cornered Russian Bear, then that is what it will get.

    The oil price collapse over the last few years was no accident - it was designed to hurt Russia as much as the shale oil producers in the US & the Canadian tar sands. Notice how OPEC was suddenly able to strike a deal after the US elections, despite being unable to do so for years. The oil price has started to rise, which will benefit Russia. There's a new paradigm coming, and countries know it.


    You're so smart in your answers dear @BondJames. Very long answers, without actually agreeing on one tiny bit of argument from three very long insightful articles. You start praising The Economist for being a good source, for students no less. But there it already stops. Because during that entire post there's not one tiny bit of a self-admitting sentence like "Hmm, that's actually true. I should have highlighted that!"

    So you're calling the kettle black, because you're opiniones as well. And frankly, there's no self-criticism or self-correction in your posts either. So one could say I posted these articles for nothing, since most people in here, and especially you, are not responding to the actual contents of these articles. So there you have it. You actually don't care at all about The 'opiniate' Economist. For you it seems like a relic from good old student times.
    I try not to level criticisms at people on this forum because I think it's counterproductive, so I won't stoop to that level now. Having said that, what I've seen of you is that you take what you read at face value. Whether it's the New York Times, or Politico, or Slate, or Bernstein (who had his heyday 40+ years ago - Woodward has been far more prolific and insightful since) or now The Economist. I see that with a lot of people. Try to be skeptical and separate the facts from the conclusions. We can all have opinions, and most of us do, including myself. That's all it is and I acknowledge that. They are like 'a' holes. Everyone has one.

    Regarding that Economist article. It has a lot of good facts in it. That is why I subscribe to the Economist. For knowledge and information.

    Russia today announced that it will not retaliate for the US sanctions imposed yesterday. Instead, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that he would work to restore ties with the incoming Trump Administration.

    "We won't be banning their families and children from the places where they usually spend the New Year holidays. Furthermore, I invite all children of American diplomats accredited in Russia to the New Year and Christmas Tree in the Kremlin." said Mr. Putin

    Mr. Trump: Your move.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38464612

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/world/europe/russia-diplomats-us-hacking.html
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It s a Goddamn peace conspiracy.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,696
    It s a Goddamn peace conspiracy.
    Piece of the world.
  • edited December 2016 Posts: 4,622
    @bondjames posted
    Mr. Putin is a proud Russian nationalist, and he is doing what he feels is right for his nation, as any leader should. Russia has been fighting an 'economic' war, an 'information' war, a 'currency' war, and a 'cyber' war with the US since he returned as President in 2012, and most clearly since 2014. Russia has been under US and EU sanctions on account of Crimea, so it's not surprising that he's beefing up the FSB and consolidating control, as he believes the West is trying to undermine him. That behaviour will continue as long as we have a hostile relationship with him - if the West wants a cornered Russian Bear, then that is what it will get.

    The oil price collapse over the last few years was no accident - it was designed to hurt Russia as much as the shale oil producers in the US & the Canadian tar sands. Notice how OPEC was suddenly able to strike a deal after the US elections, despite being unable to do so for years. The oil price has started to rise, which will benefit Russia. There's a new paradigm coming, and countries know it.

    This will help the Alberta oil sands as well. Trump will approve the Keystone pipeline from Alberta into the USA, which Obama had been stonewalling.
    Even our rather useless Cdn PM has greenlighted a couple of domestic pipeline projects in recent weeks.

    @bondjames you're studied analysis of the behavioural patterns of the Russian bear are astute. Well presented. We are all that much more informed and prescient on the potential future prowlings and growlings, yet to emanate from "friend" Putin and the big bear of the east.

    I do applaud Obama for losing his mind basically, and throwing everything he's got at Putin and Mother Russia in the wake of the Homeland Security and FBI revelations.
    He really has no choice. Good to see him standing up for himself at least.
    Russia has had no use for this administration since day one. Putin has always had utter disdain for Obama. He's treated him like a chump.
    Compare with Canadian Prime Minister Harper. Putin also didn't like Harper, because Harper did take adversarial stands versus Putin, but Putin didn't show the same contempt.
    Harper he respected as fellow strongman, even if Canada only has so much clout on the world stage.
    But I didn't need Homeland Security and FBI revelations to know that Russia absolutely had enacted full-scale cyber warfare, sanctioned at the highest levels, on the Democratic National Party and Party Officials.
    Russia was so obviously guilty as accused.
    Putin was determined that the Obama-Hillary alliance would be defeated.
    From Putin's perspective - Mission accomplished.
    The chutzpah is staggering.
    This is not the same as attacking actual US government departments, which would have had far more serious diplomatic and security repercussions, even if we do understand Russia will always always be engaging covert intelligence activities directed at us.
    But this attack on the DNC was brazen. No serious attempts to cover tracks it seems.
    It's revelatory of how toxic the US-Russia relationship had become under Obama.
    It doesn't tell me a whole lot new about Russia. This is how they play.
    The lengths they go to with their state sponsored Olympic cheating programs is like something out of Monty Python.
    The US government of course, lameduck administration or not, has to respond, as it is charged with protecting U.S. companies from such foreign attacks, the same as if the Russian government had cyber-attacked a major U.S. based telecom or auto giant.
    So yes, Obama - do throw it right back at them. It is the required response. Expel and sanction away.

    In response to Obama's retaliatory moves, the disrespect and contempt for the current administration though is palpable.
    It translates to middle-finger-salute. No mea-culpas here.
    Konstantin Kosachyov, chairman of the international affairs committee in the upper house of the Russian parliament, likened the Obama Administration to “the death throes of political corpses”
    The Russian Foreign Ministry said that it would make an official announcement regarding countermeasures against the U.S. on Friday. “the American people have been humiliated by their own president.”

    and then there is this later response. Putin clearly wants to end hostilities and broker a more constructive relationship with the incoming admin
    from @bondjames
    Russia today announced that it will not retaliate for the US sanctions imposed yesterday. Instead, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that he would work to restore ties with the incoming Trump Administration.

    "We won't be banning their families and children from the places where they usually spend the New Year holidays. Furthermore, I invite all children of American diplomats accredited in Russia to the New Year and Christmas Tree in the Kremlin." said Mr. Putin
    Again - the chutzpah!
    Putin and his pals it seems are laughing up a storm.

    This will be real interesting to watch. Both Putin and Trump are strongmen dedicated to furthering their own countries interests.
    But Russia and USA are not natural cultural allies. The default position for the longest time has been enemy.
    But as we've seen on the highly entertaining House of Cards TV show, the ruthless President Underwood(kevin spacey) has managed to get things done vis-a-vis his Russian counterpart. The two men have a mutual yet adversarial respect, even if the whole show is highly dramatized nonsense.
    Still they work together, yet entertain no delusions as to who is working in whose interest.
    Trump and Putin might carve out a similar rapprochement. Respectful yet wary, not to mention much alpha posturing.
    Naturally Trump's political enemies will be cheering for the relationship to fail, so I do expect much bravado and gasbagging from Trump in response.

    Get to work men! Ride On!

    trump_putin_horse.jpg

    bt2zhk_cqaadhcz.jpg


    Btw Canada beat Russia handily in opening game of world jr hockey championship. The Russian cheating was thwarted apparently. Too busy hacking the US election I guess.
    We may have made them pee twice in the bottle,too.
    Canada has also destroyed Slovakia and Latvia, with a solid thumping of the USA forecast for New Year's Eve.

    Make Canada Great Again! at World Juniors is on schedule.
    wjc.jpg?w=301&h=411

    If we win gold we will be insufferable, I promise!
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    Nice guy, that Putin. Let's make friends with him, help him rebuild his economy, and further strengthen his military. It's not like his military will harm anyone at all.

    0718_1_M.JPG
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Damn those hackers for revealing the truth!
  • edited December 2016 Posts: 4,622
    Important news reminder, the 2017 Miss Universe Pageant is exactly one month away.
    The lovely Miss Pia Alonzo Wurtzbach ‏@MissUniverse, sporting blue and signature crown will be transferring her title in her home country.

    C0Tr2NrXUAA00gv.jpg:large

    The pageant takes on added importance now, what with President-Elects history with the event and Bond Movie associations with pageant contestants.
    Miss Universe becomes defacto ambassador for universal peace and beauty
    She will play an important role alongside the new administration.

    Manila,Philippines will be hosting the next Miss Universe on Jan. 30, 2017.
    (mark the date down)

    The last time the Philippines hosted the pageant was over 20 years ago in 1994.

    The reigning Miss Universe, the lovely Pia, uploaded this short Christmas frolic during visit to USA where she met up with friends Miss USA and Miss TeenUSA
    Holiday Fun at Bryant Park

  • Maybe @BondJames likes to attend the Miss Universe pageant? Would be nice if he gives us an insightful report on that event in here. Perhaps we also find clues that the new Miss Universe would get a job at the White House.

    How lovely :-).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    chrisisall wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    He will continue to honor the time honored USA tradition of vetoing anti-Israel resolutions at the viper pit that is the United Nations.
    Yes because God knows the government of Israel NEEDS to treat the Palestinians as the Jews were once treated in Germany for cathartic reasons; it's only natural. Pass the abuse, please.
    ;)
    chrisisall wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    He will continue to honor the time honored USA tradition of vetoing anti-Israel resolutions at the viper pit that is the United Nations.
    Yes because God knows the government of Israel NEEDS to treat the Palestinians as the Jews were once treated in Germany for cathartic reasons; it's only natural. Pass the abuse, please.
    ;)
    I see you've gone from 9/11 families to jews in concentration camps as political pawns?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @timmer, I agree that there will be a lot of posturing between Messrs. Trump and Putin in 2017 as they feel each out out. It's going to be interesting to see how these alpha males mark their territory. Throw Mr. Netanyahu into the mix and we've got all the ingredients for either a giant threesome love-fest or a major pissing-match if things go sour, given all the testosterone.

    President Elect Trump tweeted his response to Mr. Putin's decision not to retaliate for Mr. Obama's sanctions. Typical Trumpian flair.
    Og5Vekj.jpg

    Mr. Putin made his new year statement today and wished several heads of state, including former US Presidents, but snubbed Mr. Obama. In a message apparently directed at the incoming Trump Administration, he said that the US & Russia:

    "acting in a constructive and pragmatic manner, will be able to take real steps to restore the mechanisms of bilateral cooperation in various areas and take their interaction in the international arena to a whole new level.... Major global and regional challenges that our countries have confronted in recent years clearly confirm that Russia-US relations are an important factor in ensuring stability and security in the modern world,"

    So both Mr. Putin & Mr. Trump seem to be brushing off these recent sanctions and looking forward to a new relationship dynamic.
    KxuAfcj.jpg
    timmer wrote: »
    Important news reminder, the 2017 Miss Universe Pageant is exactly one month away.
    Miss Philippines is quite a stunner, and I almost regret that she will be handing over the crown in January. Such is life though - change is inevitable and I hope that we are fortunate to have a worthy successor. Thanks for letting us know about the date - I have marked my calendar. Even though the President Elect unfortunately had to relinquish his ownership of the pageant in pursuit of a more noble purpose, there's no denying the importance of this event to furthering world peace - we must support it fully.
    Maybe @BondJames likes to attend the Miss Universe pageant? Would be nice if he gives us an insightful report on that event in here. Perhaps we also find clues that the new Miss Universe would get a job at the White House.

    How lovely :-).
    I only wish this was possible. Sadly, I will not be able to attend such event, but will no doubt be enjoying it on tv. I understand that Fox has the broadcast rights this year.
    I haven't heard of this organization, but am concerned about these recent attempts to censure Facebook. We should be able to get our information from multiple sources and make up our own minds about we feel is important. I'm not keen on attempts at information suppression, which seems to be a new trend by Western Governments. That's no different from the behaviour of repressive and despotic regimes.

    The President Elect will be celebrating New Year in customary fashion at his Florida Mar-a-Lago estate. These are photos from the big party last year. I look forward to seeing the new First Family in their new Washington DC abode shortly.
    bss9pln.jpg
    4U3TcIC.jpg
  • edited December 2016 Posts: 4,622
    @bondjames wrote
    Even though the President Elect unfortunately had to relinquish his ownership of the pageant in pursuit of a more noble purpose, there's no denying the importance of this event to furthering world peace - we must support it fully.
    Agreed. I will be asking @dimi if perchance I might attend on behalf of honorable message board, bearing greetings and good tidings on behalf of on-line 007 community.
    Bond filmdom and pageant contestants have a long and happy history.
    I would of course, like my travel, hotel and meals covered, plus generous expense allowance, so that interactions with participants might be conducted with appropriate style and splendor, as befitting such an august event on the galactic stage.

    ==I do hope btw, that Obama continues to sanction, expel and blast away at Mother Russia. The more ruckus he creates the better.
    This will give President-Elect extra leverage on the magnanimous front, when it comes time to make nice.
    At this level you cannot have too much leverage.

    A Happy Trump New Year!

    giphy.gif

    donald-trump.jpg

    Happy New Year greetings from Miss Universe Peace Ambassadors!



  • edited January 2017 Posts: 11,119

    So Donald Trump rips civil rights activist John Lewis on Twitter this time. The man he worked closely together with Martin Luther King:
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-john-lewis-233630

    Can I give you an advice Mr Trump? Regardless of how others are attacking you, YOU need to show a presidential attitude. People will judge YOU end of this month. So please....if you do prefer to have a succesful first term, you really ought to stop these Twitter attacks. Already a pretty large majority of Americans think you should stop twittering so much, you are the one that needs to set good examples, not those attacking you.

    And then there is this news in which you announce, Mr Trump, that you prefer to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem? Oooowh God, I warn you, don't do this please, just don't:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/10/us-embassy-jerusalem-palestine-donald-trump-tel-aviv

    There still isn't peace there, but you are basically destroying every hope of peace up there. And while you criticise others for creating ISIS, you are basically giving ISIS a reason to cooperate heavily with Hamas this way. Please don't open this Pandora's Box.

    And lastly, why, dear Trump, do you admire Putin more than civil rights activist John Lewis? Why do you admire Putin more than other autocratic leaders like the Chinese Xi Jinping? Isn't it slightly dubious that you have such personal affiliation with Putin? Should a US president sometimes not throw personal friendships aside for the sake of US interests? I mean, is it really necessary to make enemies with the CIA, NSA and FBI?
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-dossier-intel-20170111-story.html


    To summarize: The upcoming four years will be a very bumpy ride for the USA. And I'm afraid not in a good way. We've never had a president that behaves like the exponential of Nixon, by always responding to his so called 'enemies', by always attacking them, instead of staying focused on own policies :-(.

    I wish you good luck my dear USA. I hope Europe and USA will stick together tightly :-(.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489


    And lastly, why, dear Trump, do you admire Putin more than civil rights activist John Lewis? Why do you admire Putin more than other autocratic leaders like the Chinese Xi Jinping? Isn't it slightly dubious that you have such personal affiliation with Putin? Should a US president sometimes not throw personal friendships aside for the sake of US interests? I mean, is it really necessary to make enemies with the CIA, NSA and FBI?
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-dossier-intel-20170111-story.html


    State sponsored media get edited by the intelligence services, but I know you approve of that.
  • Posts: 6,601
    I sadly agree with this article. Not stating Clinton was better, because she certainly was not but officially taking Trump off my list as the better man. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-30/trump-exactly-where-elites-want-him

  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    Anyone seen the latest Isis video a few kids between 5-10 years of age shooting a man in the face killing him and a few of them beheading guys and throwing their heads down a slide at a playscape... I can't believe it actually showed the entire thing. Most of their videos censor it but wow... The media hasn't said anything about this...
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I apologize for not posting here since the New Year. It's been somewhat intentional, as I was hoping not to stir the pot further as we get closer to the inauguration of the 45th President, which I'm very much looking forward to. With any luck, I assumed, the hateful and negative rhetoric would die down. Sadly, it has not happened. So here we go again...

    Regarding John Lewis. I personally have great respect for his past and his contributions to civil rights. Having said that, imho, he should kindly stfu, respect the results of the election and show some deference to the elected incoming president of the United States. There is a reason why voters have a low opinion of Congress, and he risks becoming part of the problem rather than part of the solution with these kind of emotionally charged remarks.

    Regarding moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem: I am against this personally. I honestly don't know what President Elect Trump has in mind vis-a-vis the Isreal/Palestine situation. He started out last year saying that he wanted to be an honest mediator, but then got a lot of pushback from AIPAC, and has since increasingly sided with the hardline Likud coalition which runs Israel. This near intractable problem has frustrated and flummoxed all previous Administrations since Israel's founding & the situation today is far worse than it's ever been. I wish him well on whatever strategy he has in mind (which is most likely not the one he is disclosing in the open, given his negotiating skills).

    Regarding Russia: I have tried to explain this several times in the past (including on the old closed down thread) and yet some continue to bang the drums here like lemmings, regurgitating the standard media talking points to further their political bias. The Russian issue is a MIC engineered issue - pure and simple. They, through their willing cohorts within the Intelligence Agencies and the Congress/Senate (fully bought and paid for) are attempting (as they did with Iraq and Syria before) to change public opinion in order to increase weapons sales into Ukraine and Nato, now that Syria is a lost cause. Moreover, this Russia saber rattling benefits the EU (and particularly Merkel, Fillon, Valls et al) who must have a demon to wage their political campaigns against during a prevailing mood for change. It's the same chumps (McCain, Graham et al) who are behind this war mongering, and it is McCain himself (no doubt at Graham's urging) who gave the rubbish fake news report to the FBI (in an attempt to discredit the President Elect). Mr. Trump knows who is behind this, and they are about to be politically marginalized. I appreciated the way he handled that news conference a few days back and pushed back on this nonsense. I wish him luck as he attempts to steer the banking/military cabal, which ultimately runs the US Govt, in a different direction. One can see how ingrained they are within the US establishment (policy, media, both sides of the aisle). It remains a formidable threat from within. This was the #1 reason I wanted Hillary Clinton to lose - because the cart was leading the horse with her. With Mr. Trump, there will be a refocusing of priorities, although the MIC's continued dangerous influence is inevitable.

    President Elect Trump is neither a white knight nor a devil. He is as 'establishment' as the rest of them, and probably more so. He knows all the bankers, all the politicians, many of the heads of state (but ironically, not Putin) and most of the donors. A lot of this is for show anyway.
    C5mcnNj.jpg

    It will be a combative, spirited, volatile and highly entertaining presidency, as the US tries to reposition itself & become relevant again in a fast changing world. There will be tensions, but I have every confidence Mr. Trump will ultimately 'trump' his adversaries. He's ready for the fight, and they've shown their cards.
  • Posts: 618
    Welcome back, bondjames. You have been missed!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Welcome back, bondjames. You have been missed!
    Thank you kindly @Escalus5. Much appreciated.
    NTzBcEJ.gif

    Sadly, some of us are old enough to remember Tony Blair’s Government making public a ‘dossier’ (sound familiar? So James Bondish!) about Saddam trying to buy uranium from Niger. This formed one of the key arguments for the fabricated Iraq debacle, which the world still pays for today, including not only thousands of Middle Easterners, but also poor innocents maimed in Western countries by ISIL/Daesh. This time around, it’s not the British Government, but rather an Ex-MI6 employee who is providing the ‘trumped up’ fairy tales to US Intelligence services, while willing fools in Congress go along for the ride again. The stench is all too familiar sadly. "Governments change, but the lies stay the same". ;)
  • GBFGBF
    edited January 2017 Posts: 3,195
    @bondjames

    I respect your opinion but sorry, with regard to foreign policy, I disagree completely. In a recent interview with German and Britain newspapers, Trump responded so naively and without being informed about anything. He said the NATO is obsolete but still very important. Only 5 of the 22 NATO countries would pay their share (even though there are 28 NATO countries). He said he doesn't know Putin but he repsects him, he doesn't know Merkel, but he respects her somehow. He does not seem to know any politician outside the US. He said, he is proud of GB voting for the Brexit. Why? What does he have to do with the EU? Shouldn't he stay neutral on such a topic, alone for diplomatic reasons? In fact, he seems to have no strategy concerning foreign policy. Even those who think that Trump and Putin may have a better relationship than Obama and Putin, will be disappointed. Both are such narcissists and in any case there is an isue that collides with Trump's "America first" strategy, there will be a similar conflict as there is already between US and China.
    Having in mind all that and that the US is the most important and influential country in the world, these are not a very good news.
  • GBFGBF
    edited January 2017 Posts: 3,195
    PS: You are right by saying that people should respect the majority of voters. However, this is very often misused as an argument to disrespect any criticm on the elected politician. In fact, not even half of the Americans voted for Trump but he is soon supposed to be the president of ALL Americans and he should balance the interests of ALL Americans. He should further keep in mind how important it is to conduct a foreign policy. He however behaves very nationalistically by his "Ameirca first" policy which is rather an "America only" policy. And I mean, you simply cannot affront other foreign leaders as he did. This is highly undiplomatic and will harm the US in the long run.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 11,119
    Well, it's very simple really. The keyword is 'protectionism'. And Trump will try to effectuate this strongly. If he wants to do that however, he could clash with the likes of Lyndsey Graham, John McCain, Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan. A powerful portfolio of Republicans that will most certainly vote "No" against releasing the Russian sanctions.

    But on the whole, ancient 'protectionism' will be Trump's theme during his first term as US president. Which reminds me a lot of the USA pre-World War I. Not all too good if you ask me. Because protectionism usually means less trade (due to higher trade tarifs). Less trade relates to less economic growth. And less economic growth means pressure, high pressure, on Trump's good old adage to lower taxes. Because if you like it or not, we do need taxes.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @GBF, I have seen excerpts of the interview that you are referencing but have not seen the whole thing. I actually agree with President Elect Trump on Nato, and you may be surprised to learn that so does Mr. Obama, who also commented several times in the past that certain countries should pony up for the protection they receive from the US government. The only difference here is in the method of getting to a more preferred result. Mr. Trump's techniques are different, & are more assertive & bombastic. I believe he will get closer to what the US wants on this front (and which is its right), but it will be messy & unpretty. Mr. Obama was a jabber. Mr. Trump is a slugger and counterpuncher. One is pretty to watch, and the other isn't. Both get results, but in different ways.

    His view on Mr. Putin is no different (if one reads between the lines) from Mr. Obama's view on Pakistan, Russia and Iran prior to him winning in 2008. At the time, Mr. Obama's approach to talk with these countries was widely criticized as naive. Same thing now. Bottom line: as I've said, the military and banking (you can add oil to that) industries control US foreign policy. They have done so for years. Every president acquiesces eventually to the power that this group (who Eisenhower warned about decades ago) wields. President Elect Trump may do so eventually as well, but prior to that, he is resetting and redirecting this behemoth cabal in a different direction. I wish him well, because the current approach is not working. The only areas I am not in agreement with him so far is on siding with Likud & with tearing up the Iran nuclear deal (also a Likud favourite). I am more in line with Messrs. Obama and Kerry on that.

    Regarding relationships with Mr. Putin and Ms. Merkel, I don't see anything wrong with wanting better relationships with them. We have several (roughly 450) nuclear warheads currently on 'high alert'. It would be preferable if we can de-escalate tensions. I don't expect there to ever be 'warm' relations between Russia and the US, and Mr. Trump has pretty much said as much too. They are natural geopolitical rivals. What he is hoping to do is ensure that it's not a highly antagonistic relationship if possible, which is no different from the 'Russian reset' technique that Hillary Clinton attempted in 2009 after the Georgia war.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-tierney/why-are-us-nuclear-missil_b_12786576.html

    Regarding Brexit: You suggested that Mr. Trump should have been neutral? Why? Was Mr. Obama neutral when he went to the UK prior to the vote and essentially threatened the British people with being “back of the queue” if they made a sovereign decision that he disagreed with? Mr. Trump wasn't president then, but rather an observer. He read the political tea leaves brilliantly and sided with the winning team. I don't even recall what his opponent said on the matter (hedging probably, as she is known to do).

    Regarding trade: The President Elect's approach is to improve and influence bilateral relationships between key trading nations and blocks. His team feels that the multilateral deals end up being ineffective for American workers in the long run due to all the parties involved. I posted a detailed link on the approach earlier on this thread when reporting on Mr. Mnuchin & Ross as Treasury and Commerce secretaries respectively. Keep in mind that these 'trade deals' are an instrument of foreign policy first and foremost. The incoming administration knows this and once again, they have a different geopolitical strategy than the past.

    I think you will be quite surprised by what Mr. Trump's foreign policy intentions really are. I can see how he is approaching most of this, because I have learned to understand his modus operandi. There is a method to the madness, and you will see it play out over several years. It has already begun on the domestic jobs front before he's even become president. Some things are beyond the US's control (like Syria & perhaps Israel/Palestine) and other things are very much within the US's control (like China's approach to the US). The trick is to focus on what one can change and not waste time on things that cannot be altered.

    Some people seem to believe that the status quo is a good thing. I have been viewing the world with interest for some time, and in my view, where we are currently is not all that great. The US's influence is declining very fast globally, Europe is on the verge of disintegration, China is stronger than ever and making self-serving resource deals everywhere, Iran is becoming far more influential, Israel is increasingly marginalized, North Korea is beligerant, The US isn't dealing with Pakistan (a nuclear power) & Russia isn't cooperating. I welcome a new approach, but understand that the changes will come with difficulty.

    PS: Regarding Brennan's comments on the talk shows yesterday: I was under the impression that the CIA was concerned with toppling foreign governments. One could be forgiven for thinking that they've taken Mr. Trump's America First mantra to heart, and are now focused on toppling an incoming domestic one.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 11,119
    So much text, so little criticism on Trump. So many arguments, so little potential havoc that Trump is already creating for himself during his president-elect period. So many nuanced reactions, but so little problems you could discover when simply looking at Trump's personality. Just replace the name of Trump with that of Obama in your arguments @BondJames, and the tone and style suddenly makes much more sense.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Indeed @Gustav_Graves, I think it's helpful not to think, act and behave like a partisan hack. I have always been quite deferential towards Mr. Obama. He wasn't perfect, but he tried his best, and so will President Elect Trump.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    Indeed @Gustav_Graves, I think it's helpful not to think, act and behave like a partisan hack. I have always been quite deferential towards Mr. Obama. He wasn't perfect, but he tried his best, and so will President Elect Trump.

    If you were referring to me....I'm not partisan. And frankly you should know that Trump by far isn't a Republican. Yes, the man hijacked the party. But in any normal democracy a man like Trump should have started a new movement or party. Just like Ross Perot.

    Yes, I agree that Obama wasn't perfect. But that goes for every US president. This time however the USA (or Putin) has elected a total Berlusconi-esque goon into the White House. And this time it's not about the marginal influence Italy has on this planet, but about the USA and the havoc it can create with Trump as president. The fact that this man openly drives a wedge between the USA and Europe should worry everyone.

    I always looked up to the USA. Thanks to the Marshall Plan.....a country like The Netherlands ggrew on equal footing with the USA, economically, financially and even politically. And now....now the man wants to anger all nations on this globe, from China to Netherlands, Germany to France, from Japan to Korea, from Scotland to the EU. Except a few nations he personally likes so much, because of some twisted admiration for one guy or one risky event: The UK, Israel and Russia. This apparent random 'personal love and admiration for some and mistrust for many others' is IMO unheard of and even dangerous.

    I am partisan? In this case not so much. I am worried about Trump and that has nothing to do with a partisan approach. Hell, in hindsight I would have loved John McCain to become the next US president. Trump's world is a divided world, in which protectionism is the new now. A world that scares me really.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    And frankly you should know that Trump by far isn't a Republican. Yes, the man hijacked the party. But in any normal democracy a man like Trump should have started a new movement or party. Just like Ross Perot.
    I disagree. It's precisely because he isn't a traditional Republican that the other side should try to influence and work with him. There is no way that an independent candidate could have won the White House. It's a doomed strategy. The system won't permit it, which is why the President Elect's hijack approach was brilliant.
    Hell, in hindsight I would have loved John McCain to become the next US president.
    Really? Well, I can't say I agree with that. He had a 'seniors moment' after the financial crisis and also chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, indicating that his best days were well behind him.
This discussion has been closed.