Let's talk about Trump

I think you make an assumption there. Who says it was just for the sake of it?

Debatable, the Obama administration on the face of it had, hard coup attempts in Syria, Libya, Yeman, Ukraine, Egypt (which seemed to turn out ok). No progress with a belligerent China, no progress with a belligerent North Korea. A deal with Iran, which I won’t weigh in on. But also had Clinton running on policies that looked like Russia and USA would be in conflict. Not to mention ISIS.

But you see the world worse off now? How? Or under the Trump administration the world has become more chaotic? how?

I think this has consistently been your primary message, we can agree on that.

Yet another assumption. You only “know” things about Putin that Putin wants you to “know.”

Evidently neither matters to the MSM these days. For the MSM, facts matter less than narrative, and facts can be - and are - made up.

N. Korea - Giving Kim Jong In whatever he wants while he continues forward with his nuclear program and testing behind our backs. Not only no progress but undermining the effectiveness and function of diplomacy in the state department.

Iran - Trump took a mulitlateral deal that Iran was fully compliant with, sabotaged it, and brought us to the brink of war with Iran.

Russia - Obama actually placed sanctions on Russia. Trump tried to remove them and Congress had to step in. They are running havoc on elections all over Europe.

Brexit/EU - Seems conservatives have walked themselves into a mess they have no solution for much like healthcare in the US. Trump has only created further chaos but undermining European allies at every turn.

Afghanistan - Trump was ready to bring the Taliban to camp David just before they carried out an attack. Clearly no progress and not any closer to a peace deal.

Trade Wars - Trump sabotaged the multilateral TPP which was the best option to contain China. Working with our allies to contain China is a far better option than punishing American consumers and the economy with tariffs. In trade wars, nobody wins.

Silly acronyms or made up phenomena do not make your argument more credible (Deep State, TDS, MSM, Q). How logical does it sound that every media outlet is lying except Fox News? On what planet does that make sense?

2 Likes

Right here on Earth, and if you don’t realize it then you’re part of the problem.

Because the last 50 years of policy with regards North Korea has worked so well?

True. I don’t think Obama found the peace pill and I don’t know where Trump is going with regards Iran except to say I oppose conflict.

Russia is a big topic, they are a distrustful lot, neither Trump or Hillary would have been trusted by them.

Brexit is another topic on it’s own, feel free to join discussion in that thread. Unless the reference is to globalism vs nationalism. There is a crossover with regards Trump there.

No, there seems little progress. Sadly. I think it’s somewhat unfair to lay that at the door of Trump.

Well on this point I am diametrically opposed to the TPP agreement. That was a feature not a flaw of Trump. Yes, you are right it was designed to contain China, but discussing the merits and flaws of such an agreement and how that might have impacted the population at large is a whole debate in itself.

I think all these are used widely enough to be well known and in common use, for U.S. political junkies any way. On a U.K. thread I wouldn’t explain BoJo or the Murdoch press; on a Canadian one I’d use JT.

1 Like

Who said Fox News is not lying too?

1 Like

Say something over and over again until it becomes true. Is that the strategy?

1 Like

I’d love to hear your perspective on that. I have plenty of firsthand experience of how the TPP would have benefitted companies in the US. Europe is now taking advantage and moving full steam ahead while US companies get left behind And we already see what damage the trade war is doing.

N Korea froze their nuclear program from 1995-2000. Diplomacy works just as it did in Iran.

Can can anyone not in N Korea know this to be true?

Ah yes more conspiracy theories. You can win any argument if you just accept there is no truth.

1 Like

lol. Another assumption by you, then.

I do not trust a statement like “N Korea halted nuke dev for six years” unless it can be independently verified. That you wish to trust the NYT on this is not my problem it’s yours and the nation’s.

This is not me vs MSM, it’s common sense.

I’ve discussed this to an extent with someone who is working on the EU equivalent treaty with the US. It boils down to this for me, sovereign states relinquishing power to corporations, when the corporate interest is to make more money as something they hold most dear, over the responsibility of a government to put their citizens interests first.

Governments, or even local councils should put the interests of the people they represent first. There is a counter argument to this, which is local governments and Governments in general tend towards corrupt intent, how do corporations compete fairly in such circumstances?

So there is the conflict. Deep state is not happy with Trump.

This is an understatement.

Funny how three years ago it put the speaker firmly in the category of conspiracy theorist. Now, though, it’s become all too obviously true.

There is already an independent body it’s called the IAEA. Ever heard of it or is that part of the deep State?

https://web.archive.org/web/20060927211727/http://www.thebulletin.org/popup/popup1.htm

1 Like

Seems the Deep State can mean whatever we want it to mean. As long as independent governmental organizations are not supporting our agenda there must be a conspiracy to undermine us. Nevermind standing policies or rule of law.

1 Like

You’re asking the wrong person. Ask Kim if N Korea has ever allowed IAEA an honest inspection there.

Not surprising, though. I’m sure there are plenty of libs who trust the UN, too.

qed

For anyone making the fear mongering the sovereignty argument, I say look at the WTO which has worked for decades and never once superceded the sovereignty of the United States. Countries need a body to litigate disputes or they would never join in the first place. It’s standard practice in international law.

1 Like