Today Trump Became President ... again
« prev   random   next »

1
2

Today Trump Became President ... again

By Rew following x   2017 Oct 30, 11:49pm 2,026 views   80 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


#TrumpIsPresident #LizardsForTrump

The 4:37am tweet, before the charges were leveled, and all was made known, was very presidential. Classic. :)



In light of the indictment, and especially the plea, here is what I think some of the sharpest analysis has been so far, and what we can expect to watch in messaging.

Mueller & Team:

They sent a clear message today that there are two roads. The road of non-compliance is a path to indictment and every charge they can find (Manafort). This is the path of pain. The road Papadopoulos chose, via plea deals, leads to light sentencing and much more favorable personal outcomes. The plea deal is by far more significant in many ways as well. It's also interesting that Manafort is a much larger fish than many predicted be an initial charge in something like this. He is very well known. The charges are not collusion, but corruption. Contrast that with Papadopoulos, a low ranking nobody, errand boy, who sang like a canary and is on the Russian collusion track. Mueller is signaling "I think these are connected, and given time, I will connect the dots." Also, if someone like Papadopoulos is dirty, there must be a lot to find in camp Trump. High, low, and everywhere in between it seems like corruption oozes forth from that administration.

Then there are things like this ...
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/10/george-papadopoulos-lied-to-fbi-agents-the-same-day-trump-asked-comey-for-loyalty-pledge/ ... which you just have to chalk up to coincidence, or realize, "Oh, Trump wasn't asking Comey for the pledge of loyalty. It was Pap' all along."

We have a President who fired Comey, is Pro-Russia without a pro-stance on virtually any other country, begrudgingly enforced Russian sanctions because he was forced to, walked away from the Ukraine day 1, his son Jr.'s meeting ... I mean, look ... we don't even NEED hard evidence of collusion. The politics just have to line up enough and Trump is gone. The GOP is counting the favorability ratings, watching the dumpster fire, and waiting for their chance ... and you can see it ...

Watch the messaging close this week:

GOP: The majority will be silent on the indictment and plea. That's significant as that means they are not supporting Trump. Again, they are waiting to see if they can bury him.

"The Base" & Right Wing Media: pretty quiet today as they circled the wagons. I expect a lot more crazy like the "Mueller will charge Hillary" stuff. It is getting beyond tin-foil hat now. Mueller might get a few more smear campaigns against him from this arm as well.

Edit: Nice one from today ...
https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/10/31/alex-jones-there-plot-install-robert-mueller-first-king-america/218401

Trump Administration: spin spin spin. It's going to be about getting distance, "Mana-who?". Above all, you will see, "But that isn't about the President. The President isn't charged. That's not collusion."

Dems/Libs/Resistance: smiles, laughing, and looking to stick the dagger in where they can. No real movement on the political scale or investigative track will be had here. This will be inconsequential, like the Trump administration's reaction and actions.

Longer Term:

Trump's multi-dimensional always one step ahead chess (snicker) is getting very simplistic now: is there more embarrassment and pain if I stay or if I go? Can I fire Mueller, as the ultimate gambit? Will the GOP and public call me on it? Can I protect my family more?

I expect more fun in 3-6 months here from Mueller and crew. I also think if Jr. gets near the sights it is game over for Trump. He will quit.

« First    « Previous     Comments 28 - 67 of 67     Last »

41   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 31, 10:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

YesYNot says
He was offering to update his Russian colleagues during the campaign


?? What was he doing during the campaign??

YesYNot says
and trying to figure out how best to monetize his position.


I wouldn't doubt this if there were evidence. Its a likely story. However what did he actually DO towards that goal in regards to his position w trumps campaign? Are you making assumptions or do you know of something?
42   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 31, 10:43pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
if/when hard evidence


When you find hard evidence let us know...

In the meantime, we DO have hard evidence of DNC crimes regarding HRC's campaign. We also have plenty of hard evidence of HRC's past crimes.

So far no evidence regarding Trump whatsoever
43   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 31, 10:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says

The most Pro-Russian president of my lifetime? One bending over in Ukraine? One loathe to level sanctions unanimously passed by Congress against Russia? An America retrenching to isolationism, alienating allies, and running from its spot of "leader of the free world"? Civil unrest and divisiveness in the US itself? The gift of an ineffectual government in your largest adversary?


Lets say all of this is true and not just your fever dream... How does any of this help Russia?

Follow the money and influence. Putin and the Russians are nowhere near the most direct beneficiaries of civil unrest as blamed on trump by the left .
44   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 31, 10:54pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
In the meantime, we DO have hard evidence of DNC crimes regarding HRC's campaign. We also have plenty of hard evidence of HRC's past crimes.


Yawn. You have tin-foil hat theories pushed by right wing propaganda outlets. Looks there will be some special investigations though. Hope you get some quality litigators and investigators there. You will need 'em.

I couldn't care less if they harpoon Hillary.

Can you say the same of Trump? ;)
45   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 31, 10:59pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
Rew says

Oh, I think Dems are seeking to protect and ensure all leads are chased:


Great. Then you agree w Trey Gowdy that we should investigate Hillary and the DNC for money laundering and campaign finance violations. Ya know because $12 million invested secretly via a law firm violates the spirit of campaign finance law and is a major red flag for money laundering amongst a myriad of other crimes. Trey Gowdy described both the scale and method as "unheard of" .
46   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 31, 11:18pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
Then you agree w Trey Gowdy that we should investigate Hillary and the DNC for money laundering and campaign finance violations.


For what little I know, besides being pretty politically motivated, Gowdy seems like he has enough sense to call it like it is, which is to say he isn't a muck raker or fabricator.

I think they are investigating the FBI, the timeline and decisions around the HRC investigations, not HRC/the DNC. Right? They will also look into why the exoneration letter was written days before HRC or key people were even interviewed. I'm pretty sure the House committee is simply going to find that the FBI (Comey) knew they had zip, zero, nada, because it was all bogus.

Knock yourself out House Oversight. If they do find something to charge, excellent. Do be clear on "who" they are actually looking at though ... they are after the FBI itself. :) That's fun.

Gowdy is also telling all the GOP to back off Mueller and let him and the Russian probe do their job.
47   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 31, 11:44pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
Lets say all of this is true and not just your fever dream... How does any of this help Russia?


The benefit to Russia is expanded influence and business across the globe. I don't mean to be insulting, but do you really not understand how nation states compete with one another?

CBOEtrader says
Follow the money and influence. Putin and the Russians are nowhere near the most direct beneficiaries of civil unrest as blamed on trump by the left .


Most direct, maybe not, greatest beneficiaries ... absolutely. We are 10+ years, maybe two generations, away from reclaiming what we once had and it was pissed away in under a year.
48   curious2   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 1, 12:45am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
Trump is simply a showman interested in being on TV and liked.

Or do you really believe he is trying to save the American middle class?


When he declared his candidacy, I assumed that it was a publicity stunt, and that he would drop out as he had done in the past. I did guess correctly that he would never release his taxes, but I did not guess that he could win without doing that. He likes winning, and he might want a second term, even though I think that would be a mistake for both him and the republic. Ideally, he and the country should find an honorable way for him to retire, e.g. by replacing Mike Pence with Ivanka Trump. Jimmy Kimmel suggested promoting the President to King, which isn't even a real title in our system, but we can all agree to call him that and applaud while he waves in parades.

I do really believe he wants to provide for his children and grandchildren, and he is smart enough to know what Islam commands believers to do to them.

Rew says
The rest is a typical attitude of those who don't know, or would like to believe Naval service isn't forward deployed, engaged with the enemy, and somehow "less risky" than boots on the ground. To date for 2017, we have lost more on ships than in Afghanistan.


Due almost entirely to episodes of poor seamanship on the part of Navy personnel, not due to getting shot or blown up by ISIL. Navy ships colliding accidentally with allied merchant vessels is even worse than running aground, which has also happened. Seriously, I'm surprised you would draw attention to those in this context; you're doing Beijing's PR job for them:

"Beijing ridicules Seventh Fleet after warships’ collisions

A semi-submersible ship – reportedly Chinese-built – has been deployed to tow the badly damaged USS John S McCain back to its home port in Yokosuka, Japan, after the 8,300-ton guided-missile destroyer’s collision in August that claimed the lives of 10 of its crew, and left another five injured.

The John S McCain will join the USS Fitzgerald, which was involved in an earlier collision with a container ship that killed seven in June.
***
The fact that seamen on the sinking Fitzgerald, after a blackout that downed all electronic devices, had to use a private cellphone to send SOS signals has evoked much derision among fans of the Chinese military, as they jeered that ships of the ace US Seventh Fleet couldn’t even sail properly at night and therefore posed a grave danger to other vessels, as such collisions occurred not just once but twice.
"

You don't get to claim combat pay, nor steal any part of anyone else's glory, for accidentally crashing into an allied container ship.
49   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 1, 3:04am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
Can you say the same of Trump? ;)


Throw anyone in prison who is guilty. IDGAF about Trump. I do care about swamp-led witch hunts wherein they chase away any outsiders from their club.

The swamp (repubs and dems, their billionaire masters, the shill media and universities who support them) has colluded to sell our country out for years for their own profit. The media has been a propaganda mouthpiece at least as far back as JFK https://twitter.com/iwillredpillyou/status/923735144057528320. We are a few steps away from a pure 1984 police state thanks to both Bush and Obama. So yes, it is of upmost importance to me that we enforce our laws against corrupt politicians and bring back constitutional limits of government.

There is a mountain of hard evidence for HRC corruption.

By comparison, there has so far been no hard evidence regarding Trump. This is a "show me the man, I'll show you the crime" type of situation for the media. Legally, Trump is not in any way under investigation by Mueller or anyone else. The talking heads seem to forget that fact.
50   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 1, 3:17am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
I don't mean to be insulting, but do you really not understand how nation states compete with one another?


Um... please explain how Antifa attacking any wrong thinker creates a motive for Russia. By your logic, if the USA is simply in competition with other nation states AND the USA having problems equates to a benefit for other nation states, then again why is Russia singled out? WikiLeaks DNC emails confirmed China, Russia, and Iran at a minimum ALL HAD HRC's emails since she decided to carry an unencrypted blackberry into china. This is a very clear violation of the espionage act. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Either HRC is too technologically ignorant to run a 7/11 and refuses to follow basic protocol that may mildly inconvenience herself, or she sold out state secrets. Both the behavior and the damage would be the same in either scenario. Its a violation of the espionage act either way. Pure. Hard. Evidence.
51   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 1, 4:57am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
Pure. Hard. Evidence.


What a second--the hard evidence is WikiLeaks DNC emails showing that she carried a blackberry into China? That's your hard evidence?
52   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 1, 6:11am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
?? What was he doing during the campaign??

Many places reported that he made the offer to Deripaska. Here's one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/manafort-offered-to-give-russian-billionaire-private-briefings-on-2016-campaign/2017/09/20/399bba1a-9d48-11e7-8ea1-ed975285475e_story.html?utm_term=.6c241e6f45b6
I don't have proof, but the reporting is that Mueller has the documents. It's not in the indictment, so if we stick to that, we don't have proof at the moment. But claiming it was all in the long ago past seems rich considering what is being reported and the nature of the man in question.

As far as the connection goes between Manafort and Podesta, we will have to see. This seems like a fair write-up: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/357884-podesta-group-is-one-of-the-companies-mentioned-in-manafort. It was not John Podesta, but his brother. Podesta claims that he has signed affidavits claiming that the intermediary he was supposed to be working for was not a foreign government. I have no idea how likely it is that he was not in the know.
53   errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 1, 6:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

The swamp (repubs and dems, their billionaire masters, the shill media and universities who support them) has colluded to sell our country out for years for their own profit

—————

Your missing the two biggest players: The Militarized Police State, and the Christian Church. Why do you think that is? It doesn’t get any swampier and anti-American then The Church and The Police State, shitting all over the Constitution and the people of this country 24/7.
54   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 1, 7:29am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
By your logic, if the USA is simply in competition with other nation states AND the USA having problems equates to a benefit for other nation states, then again why is Russia singled out?

I would say that there are two reasons. First and foremost is documentation that has been reported on but has not been released publicly. Second is what Russia has been doing around the world lately. They have reportedly been more aggressive in this area. China is just quietly (at least under the radar in our press) building relationships to supplant our position as top economic power. Russia has been meddling in elections and supporting dissent in other countries.
None of the evidence of this has been made public, so you have to believe in our institutions (press and intel agencies). If you think that those are totally corrupt and involved in a giant conspiracy to do ___ , then you will most likely side with Trump.
55   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 1, 7:39am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CBOEtrader says

There is a mountain of hard evidence for HRC corruption.


Trump has been president 10 months now with the investigative resources of the entire federal government at his disposal along with your claim of a mountain of hard evidence and hillary hasn't even been looked into at all.

So what happened to throw hillary in jail? Is trump massively corrupt and on hillarr's payroll or is he the most incompetent president in history?

Want to explain this paradox? I'll be waiting and waiting and waiting.
56   jazz_music   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 1, 11:13am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
Legally, Trump is not in any way under investigation by Mueller or anyone else. The talking heads seem to forget that fact.


Your talking heads mention Mueller in combination with the lack of a Clinton investigation for the entire week leading up to the indictments they knew were coming. They suggested that Trump fire Mueller for conflicts of his own.

Also WSJ talks recommends Trump pardon everyone under investigation over Russia, the election and the collusion, oh yeah, WSJ are owned by the same propagandists now. The leggy blondes at Fox who consider themselves to be reporters are very embarrassed at the blatant deceit the network is propagating ESPECIALLY in the last 2 weeks leading up to the indictments. The connection between Clinton and the uranium deal has even less substance to it than the Benghazi extravaganza and that is the reason the story has remained a non issue until the indictments threatened to steal the show.

Oh yeah, addiction, Trump doesn't even seem to have a handle on the fact that people are getting addicted by prescriptions not by experimenting. There is a big story there about big pharma who will remain untouched by Fox for sure.

Both Fox and WSJ focus on the fact that the charges over Russia's efforts to put Trump in office to not actually connect to Trump personally yet.

Trump is not indicted but he is definitely under investigation. and remember Al Capone? --he was never charged with racketeering.

Trump will be charged with whatever offense has the best chances of prevailing and removing him from office.

All this investigation is aside from Trump's demonstrated unfitness to carry out the duties of office, his demonstrated incompetence, and his continued disregard for the rule of law.
57   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 11:55am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

CBOEtrader says
Um... please explain how Antifa attacking any wrong thinker creates a motive for Russia.


Disunity of the people, fracturing of political will, further stalling of progress to address anything needed in the US = opportunity for any American competition. When you become so inwardly focused you think the fractions of people in Antifa are a real threat, you have absolutely taken your eye off the real threats.

CBOEtrader says
Throw anyone in prison who is guilty. IDGAF about Trump.


Excellent. Hillary and Trump can both be served up. I agree.

CBOEtrader says
There is a mountain of hard evidence for HRC corruption.


"Corruption" as in chargeable by criminal wrongdoing? I don't think so. To date she has weathered everything. She is either bulletproof, or the accusations were garbage. Take your pick.

curious2 says
Due almost entirely to episodes of poor seamanship ...


Hehehe. "poor seamanship". You think suddenly the Navy forgot how to steer the boats? A series of collisions isn't sign of something else? There is a reason they require pilots to have roughly 8 hours of sleep, and not exceed a flight time of 12 hours. Got anything like that for helmsmen? Also check out combat deaths versus accidental deaths for the US military. Being deployed is typically the most dangerous thing itself. (well except when being back at home, being a jackass drinking and driving is.)

GOSH DANG IT! Regulations ruining everything again ...
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/09/20/navy-issues-new-sleep-and-watch-schedule-rules-for-the-surface-fleet/
58   anon_7c0c9   ignore (3)   2017 Nov 1, 12:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
They've all been too consumed looking for FAKE Russian collusion.


He's not talking about the special prosecutor piggy, he's talking about the entire justice department that is under his total control. You don't understand this?
59   anon_d0319   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 1:08pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Sniper says
bob2356 says
Trump has been president 10 months now with the investigative resources of the entire federal government at his disposal along with your claim of a mountain of hard evidence and hillary hasn't even been looked into at all.


They've all been too consumed looking for FAKE Russian collusion.

Please keep up.


You do know the president is in charge of the justice department don't you? Sessions works for trump. Actually I believe they teach that in 7th grade so you would have missed it since you didn't get that far. Trump can order Sessions to investigate Hillary any time. How come donald lock her up trump and jeff lock everyone up sessions haven't done anything? I mean CBO assures us there is are mountains of hard evidence.

Want to try again to answer the question? Or run and hide which is what I expect.
60   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 2:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_d0319 says
How come donald lock her up trump and jeff lock everyone up sessions haven't done anything?


Benefit of the doubt they have half a brain cell:
They don't have a means to slay that dragon and the dragon is more useful as foe that they can defend the people from. "rabble rabble rabble"

More likely:
They are too incompetent and dirty themselves to do anything themselves.
61   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 2:25pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
They don't have a means to slay that dragon and the dragon is more useful as foe that they can defend the people from. "rabble rabble rabble"


Kinda like Russia. Even though from a mix of Population, Industrial Might, etc. China is a far bigger threat.
62   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 2:43pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Kinda like Russia. Even though from a mix of Population, Industrial Might, etc. China is a far bigger threat.


While an adversary in the Pacific, China is relatively tethered to the US success as being part of its own ... and vice a versa. Economies are locked in a M.A.D. paradigm of their own.

Russia has no such general constraint, and is far more active in its testing, provocations, and attacking US interest.

One dog is bigger, but well fed, and laying down. The other dog we have repeatedly kicked and starved, and it has recently stood back up ... if it ever really did lay down/shrink from us in the first place.
63   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 2:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
While an adversary in the Pacific, China is relatively tethered to the US success as being part of its own ... and vice a versa. Economies are locked in a M.A.D. paradigm of their own.


Big Myth: Wars between big trading partners make up a large number of Wars. UK, France and Germany were huge trading partners, as was US and Japan and UK and China.

Rew says
Russia has no such general constraint, and is far more active in its testing, provocations, and attacking US interest.


We don't have interests in Central Asia or along the Don River, whatever meddling Int'l Law buffoons say. Those are the graveyards of Armies, and there's no reason to be there.

Helping an ally of 40-50 years isn't a provocation, unless you want the Jihadis to win like Obama did.
64   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 3:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Big Myth: Wars between big trading partners make up a large number of Wars. UK, France and Germany were huge trading partners, as was US and Japan and UK and China.


I think you mean to say the myth is that trading partners do not go to war. Yes. That it is a myth. What is not true is that economic relations play no effect what so ever. The closer ties and relationships countries have, generally, the more peaceful they are toward one another.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Helping an ally of 40-50 years ...


Slow the time car down TwoScoops. You cannot scrub past recent history so fast. That ally has been our chief rival since the late 40s, and that, not our previous "enemy of my enemy alliance" is what is pertinent and dictating now to our current foreign relations with Russia. The sides drawn up post WWII, with whomever was with the USSR or USA, defined the past 50 years and was the balance of world powers.

That's an impressive selective read of history you have though.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
unless you want the Jihadis to win like Obama did.


You don't find being more like Russia domestically a very anti-American stance? I'm not sure what else to call it.

Long live authoritarianism and and an iron fist, eh?

Though their skin color and religion tends to be more aligned with our majority, the Russian government isn't looking to form an alliance with us. Putin seeks revenge, vindication, expansion, scape goats for the economic plight of his people.
65   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 2, 1:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

curious2 says
the Russian government isn't looking to form.... Putin seeks....


@Rew, you might really like PBS Frontline's latest report on that topic, but contrast it with Oliver Stone's interviews if you have time.

Rew says
You think suddenly the Navy forgot how to steer the boats?


Since you have asked me a direct question, here is what I think:

"USS FITZGERALD

The collision between Fitzgerald and Crystal was avoidable and resulted from an accumulation of smaller errors over time, ultimately resulting in a lack of adherence...


@curious2 ... a link to the naval reports doesn't actually show what you think. The reports are not in conflict with what I think about these collisions. As I stated, the Navy didn't suddenly forget how it is supposed to be operating. Or to put it more plainly, you are not answering the next "why": why were watch standards not followed? Complacency and lack of preparedness are ways of saying what?

I think it will be helpful for you to continue to watch the solutions the Navy implements, as that should help you see what the actual problems were. Many of them were already implemented by Mabus, but have not taken effect yet in the fleet. It is a slow cure.
66   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 2, 1:55pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
I think you mean to say the myth is that trading partners do not go to war. Yes. That it is a myth. What is not true is that economic relations play no effect what so ever. The closer ties and relationships countries have, generally, the more peaceful they are toward one another.


Yes. Trading Partners are enthusiastic belligerents with each other. As for closer ties/relationships, see Greek City States or Medieval Europe.

Rew says
Slow the time car down TwoScoops. You cannot scrub past recent history so fast. That ally has been our chief rival since the late 40s, and that, not our previous "enemy of my enemy alliance" is what is pertinent and dictating now to our current foreign relations with Russia. The sides drawn up post WWII, with whomever was with the USSR or USA, defined the past 50 years and was the balance of world powers.


Our opposition to Russia, including invading it with Expeditionary Forces, was entirely Ideological. There is literally no reason to oppose Russia, unless you're a Georgetown IR Theorist who thinks the US could and, worse, should, muck about in Central Asia and the Steppes, where we have little to no national interest.

What we should be doing in weakening Germany, that we fought two world wars with, that is slowly dominating Europe economically and thus politically, paying billions for non-European refugees while under-contributing to NATO. Strangely enough it only took a few years after WW2 before they joined an Alliance with us.

A US-Russian Alliance would almost monopolize nuclear weapons and create an immense pool of resources controlled by both nations, and geographically dominate the Earth.

A stronger China puts the Pacific in jeopardy, we must stop transferring technology and outsourcing manufacturing there.

Rew says
You don't find being more like Russia domestically a very anti-American stance? I'm not sure what else to call it.


Tell me about democracy in Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. etc. Indonesia and Malaysia aren't that great either. Singapore is a one-party state literally run by a single extended family. Yet all have (More or Less) cooperative relationships with the USA.

The McCarthyism, not even based in ideology, is getting both dull and shrill.
67   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 2, 4:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
What we should be doing in weakening Germany, that we fought two world wars with, that is slowly dominating Europe economically and thus politically


You are targeting the new de-facto leader of the free world and Western Europe. Makes sense if you want Russia to gain and likely re-capture, if not in name in influence, many of its former satellite nations.

Russia is opposing us in every manner they can, and has been, since post WWII. They are chief nation state rivals in trade in Eastern Europe, Mid-East, and Asia. There moving to re-take satellites that revolted and kicked them out.

I am amazed that what used to be the most hawkish anti-Russian political party, in the US, now "gets wood" for Putin.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
A US-Russian Alliance would almost monopolize nuclear weapons


The advantage of going from an ability to destroy the world 50 times over to 110 times over, doesn't seem to be a profitable gain, and your statement completely ignores China, India, Pakistan, France, UK ... etc.. Where a single weapon is as dangerous as 10, and 10+ nations have them, "monopolization" is a fantasy.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
A stronger China puts the Pacific in jeopardy, we must stop transferring technology and outsourcing manufacturing there.


Somewhat agree. It matters in methods used for this.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Tell me about democracy in Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. etc. Indonesia and Malaysia aren't that great either. Singapore is a one-party state literally run by a single extended family. Yet all have (More or Less) cooperative relationships with the USA.


Your original statement is a desire to counter this: TwoScoopsMcGee says
unless you want the Jihadis to win like Obama did.
I infer this to mean being staunchly anti-muslim and anti-immigrant, of which Russia predominantly is. No one seems to be advocating for domestic policies like the other states you mentioned. The human rights of your average Russian is abysmally low. You really don't see Russia/Putin as a model for the US to follow, correct?

TwoScoopsMcGee says
The McCarthyism, not even based in ideology, is getting both dull and shrill.


There is a strong desire for authoritarianism over freedom in some of my countrymen, which is disturbing, but I'm not worried about my fellow Americans suddenly turning communist. There is an unwillingness to admit Russia has opposed and attacked us in very blatant ways the past 2-3 years. You are not even making a good counter debate in that "America was asking for it" with some of our own actions and provocations.

This new found Russian love seems strongly centered in one political ideology, alone. It actually is an ideological based love, and it forgives what Russia is doing very quickly for its own convenience: that of nativist fear.

« First    « Previous     Comments 28 - 67 of 67     Last »


Comment as anon_66d5f or log in at top of page: