North Korea and US politics

[Kroffe]

From yesterday's guardian [the paper for liberals in the uk]

US companies tell Apple and Amazon to put planet before profits

"The bosses of some of the world’s biggest companies, including Apple and Amazon, have been told to put the planet before profits – not by environmental campaigners but by other multinationals, including Danone’s US arm, and a unit of

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

.

A group of more than 30 American business leaders, including the heads of outdoor clothing brand Patagonia, The Body Shop owner Natura, Ben & Jerry’s (part of Unilever) and Danone’s US business, have taken the extraordinary step of taking out a full-page ad in Sunday’s edition of the New York Times to champion a more ethical way of doing business. The advert is aimed at members of the influential

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

(BRT) lobby group, which represents 181 of the US’s biggest companies.

and from forbes last year:

"The $1,250 iPhone XS Max Costs Apple $450 To Make, Nearly A 200% Profit Margin"

So I think there is scope for more production in the USA but the profit margin would need to be reduced and perhaps a slightly higher retail price, many products are made in the usa currently, cars, tools, all sorts of things requiring skill and time to manufacture, the prices are higher than chinese equivalents I guess but the money recirculates into the economy from the jobs it provides.

[

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

]

To think we in the west went all through the cold war spending billions and saying communism must be defeated, including the korean and vietnam wars, and then in the 90's onwards the big corporations [western europe & north america] have moved much of their production into communist china in order to profit and benefit from the cheap labour.

The hypocrisy is plain to see, plus the ethics behind it are questionable, and working conditions/demands which would not be acceptable in the west [although amazon in the uk are doing their part to lower standards here]

As a planet we need to start consuming less and have products with a longer lifespan, there's too much tech getting binned for new models which are maybe 10% better, with planned or built in obsolescence, which the EU parliament looked into a while back to try and reduce it.

If you were to buy a new iphone (made in china) each year, compared to one made in the usa that is designed to last longer, then perhaps the savings consumers currently make are overstated.

I mean theres nothing wrong with how long a phone lasts nowadays tho, right?
I have a galaxy s5 that i got 2014 (maybe 2015 not sure) and apart from a batteryswap i did last year, its working just fine.
Sure, i cant film in 4k or take 3242354 megapixel pictures, but thats not what i use my phone for anyways. And its not like that camera is bad, just bad compared to todays standard.
If we want companies to stop producing new models each year thats hardly any better, we need to stop buying new models every year. =)

 

[mack341]

I mean theres nothing wrong with how long a phone lasts nowadays tho, right?
I have a galaxy s5 that i got 2014 (maybe 2015 not sure) and apart from a batteryswap i did last year, its working just fine.
Sure, i cant film in 4k or take 3242354 megapixel pictures, but thats not what i use my phone for anyways. And its not like that camera is bad, just bad compared to todays standard.
If we want companies to stop producing new models each year thats hardly any better, we need to stop buying new models every year. =)

But that won't probably happen because of advertising, social media influence/ peer pressure, mobile phone contracts etc...I think people have slowed down and are not replacing their tech as quickly, the improvements perhaps have recently become too small to be worth it and since 2008 people are in general trying to spend less and save more. [perhaps why a recession is looming, consumer confidence is still low and personal debt high]

Though Apple R&D have probably got the next 10 years models mapped out already, their business model is partly/majorly based on planned obsolescence happening.

On top of all the tax avoidance that big corporations do I think there is more than enough scope for change in how our economies operate; atm cheap labour/ poor working conditions, mass consumerism and the throw away society + tax avoidance = a great share price and profit.

 

[Kroffe]

But that won't probably happen because of advertising, social media influence/ peer pressure, mobile phone contracts etc...I think people have slowed down and are not replacing their tech as quickly, the improvements perhaps have recently become too small to be worth it and since 2008 people are in general trying to spend less and save more. [perhaps why a recession is looming, consumer confidence is still low and personal debt high]

Though Apple R&D have probably got the next 10 years models mapped out already, their business model is partly/majorly based on planned obsolescence happening.

On top of all the tax avoidance that big corporations do I think there is more than enough scope for change in how our economies operate; atm cheap labour/ poor working conditions, mass consumerism and the throw away society + tax avoidance = a great share price and profit.

Yeah the industry is massive, and the "need" to have the latest and greatest tech among young people is big.
And like you say, companies plan many years ahead with their releases.
Why make a super-phone today that lasts many years when you can make good phones and slightly upgrade them each year. =)

Cant we just do like the generation before us, and blame the generation after us.

 

[Steviedoo]

From yesterday's guardian [the paper for liberals in the uk]

US companies tell Apple and Amazon to put planet before profits

"The bosses of some of the world’s biggest companies, including Apple and Amazon, have been told to put the planet before profits – not by environmental campaigners but by other multinationals, including Danone’s US arm, and a unit of

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

.

A group of more than 30 American business leaders, including the heads of outdoor clothing brand Patagonia, The Body Shop owner Natura, Ben & Jerry’s (part of Unilever) and Danone’s US business, have taken the extraordinary step of taking out a full-page ad in Sunday’s edition of the New York Times to champion a more ethical way of doing business. The advert is aimed at members of the influential

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

(BRT) lobby group, which represents 181 of the US’s biggest companies.

and from forbes last year:

"The $1,250 iPhone XS Max Costs Apple $450 To Make, Nearly A 200% Profit Margin"

So I think there is scope for more production in the USA but the profit margin would need to be reduced and perhaps a slightly higher retail price, many products are made in the usa currently, cars, tools, all sorts of things requiring skill and time to manufacture, the prices are higher than chinese equivalents I guess but the money recirculates into the economy from the jobs it provides.

[

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

]

To think we in the west went all through the cold war spending billions and saying communism must be defeated, including the korean and vietnam wars, and then in the 90's onwards the big corporations [western europe & north america] have moved much of their production into communist china in order to profit and benefit from the cheap labour.

The hypocrisy is plain to see, plus the ethics behind it are questionable, and working conditions/demands which would not be acceptable in the west [although amazon in the uk are doing their part to lower standards here]

As a planet we need to start consuming less and have products with a longer lifespan, there's too much tech getting binned for new models which are maybe 10% better, with planned or built in obsolescence, which the EU parliament looked into a while back to try and reduce it.

If you were to buy a new iphone (made in china) each year, compared to one made in the usa that is designed to last longer, then perhaps the savings consumers currently make are overstated.

Absolutely agree with this.

Marketing to the consumer has become about attaining the latest gadget .... we need to get out of this trend if we want to leave a better place for our children.

 

[goatwack]

Good luck slowing down mass-consumerism, every dipstick needs the latest gadget or lifetime companion fused to their hand to survive.

It's all very well people getting their knickers in a twist from the safe space Twittersphere but God forbid they have to make a pro-active choice to bin their tech toys.

My phone is so old that I don't use it or take it out, to spare it ridicule and humiliation from passers-by. I think Adam & Eve had one of these:

Awesome piece of tech......in 2006

Guess that qualifies me as the lowest carbon footprint-leaving poster on CM, possibly the internet

 

[Kroffe]

Even his hair trying to escape his politics.
I think he would look way cooler as bald.

Maybe a bit like Hank from breaking bad. =)

 

[Harry_BKK]

Mr. T's Watergate.

Falsifying an official weather map with a sharpie trying to cover up his lies.

And this popped up on my YT feed. Just watching this single short interview makes me wonder how anyone could vote for or support him. In my country, anyone from a low-level staffer to the Chancellor and President would be escorted out by security within a few minutes. They would certainly not stay in their position for another day.

 

[mack341]

I'm working on a theory, it's been mentioned in parts of the media already, that trump's fallen out with fox tv.... but will need to watch a bit more fox to confirm what I'm seeing, it maybe just certain presenters, watched last night's tucker carlson show and I don't think he mentioned trump once which I found a bit odd. Will need to watch laura ingraham and lou dobbs to see if there is a pattern.

If fox are slightly distancing themselves from trump a bit, in order to test the water for possibly other republican candidates to challenge him, then it should be possible to detect by watching the main shows. I can't see hannity changing tune as he's nailed his colours to trump's mast, ditto lou and laura really, but if the election polls coming out atm are believable, maybe the republican establishment are starting to seriously look at a backup plan. The republican media, basically fox, would have to lead the way otherwise it would never got off the ground

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Tensions between the White House and Fox News ratcheted up this week after President Donald Trump declared the network was letting his supporters down and two on-air personalities said they “don’t work” for him.

There are some rinos on the channel so it could just be that, chris wallace comes to mind, neil cavuto had mad dog mattis on his show the other day I think. Apparently also there is a taleban - usa deal being brokered atm, and some folk aren't too keen on the withdrawing of troops from that country, trump obviously would like to withdraw troops before the next election debate as he promised to do that in 2016, I think people like mattis want the troop numbers and commitment to remain unchanged.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I'm working on a theory, it's been mentioned in parts of the media already, that trump's fallen out with fox tv.... but will need to watch a bit more fox to confirm what I'm seeing, it maybe just certain presenters, watched last night's tucker carlson show and I don't think he mentioned trump once which I found a bit odd. Will need to watch laura ingraham and lou dobbs to see if there is a pattern.

If fox are slightly distancing themselves from trump a bit, in order to test the water for possibly other republican candidates to challenge him, then it should be possible to detect by watching the main shows. I can't see hannity changing tune as he's nailed his colours to trump's mast, ditto lou and laura really, but if the election polls coming out atm are believable, maybe the republican establishment are starting to seriously look at a backup plan. The republican media, basically fox, would have to lead the way otherwise it would never got off the ground

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Tensions between the White House and Fox News ratcheted up this week after President Donald Trump declared the network was letting his supporters down and two on-air personalities said they “don’t work” for him.

There are some rinos on the channel so it could just be that, chris wallace comes to mind, neil cavuto had mad dog mattis on his show the other day I think. Apparently also there is a taleban - usa deal being brokered atm, and some folk aren't too keen on the withdrawing of troops from that country, trump obviously would like to withdraw troops before the next election debate as he promised to do that in 2016, I think people like mattis want the troop numbers and commitment to remain unchanged.

FYI, Mr T increased the troops in Afganistan from about 8000 to 15,000 or thereabouts and is planning now to reduce them again. He's trying to sell that as a kept promise of "bringing troops home".

So no, he has no real plans to bring them home in the first place. The deal will go nowhere as the Afgan government was not involved, but yeah, doing some talks to sell the appearance that something is done while the Taliban are just as active as before and control more of the country compared to when Mr T took over.

 

[mack341]

FYI, Mr T increased the troops in Afganistan from about 8000 to 15,000 or thereabouts and is planning now to reduce them again. He's trying to sell that as a kept promise of "bringing troops home".

So no, he has no real plans to bring them home in the first place. The deal will go nowhere as the Afgan government was not involved, but yeah, doing some talks to sell the appearance that something is done while the Taliban are just as active as before and control more of the country compared to when Mr T took over.

Do you believe this afghanistan war is winnable?

If I was american, after 18 years I'd want out, some fox presenter yesterday was making positive comparisons with the cold war [which went on for 45 years at least] insinuating that if you want to win something you gotta be prepared for the long haul. The guest general jack keane was agreeing, and also saying if they leave, al-qaeda will return and use afghanistan as a base again to spring attacks on the usa.

I don't know what the overall cost is per year, but it must be millions of dollars and many serious casualties, it's not a featureless desert out there either, but terrain perfect for waging guerilla warfare.

Russia's got just as much to be fearful of al-qaeda style terrorists and geographically much nearer to afghanistan but if the usa left I doubt they'd be invading it as a way of solving the terrorist issue. So I don't buy that that is the real strategic aim of being out there as general keane asserted.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Of course it is not winnable, any war in the region never was. Ask the Russians how they fared. BTW, back then the closest ally of the Taliban was..... guess, guess....... the US of A!

Plus, how many wars has the US won in the last 70 years or ever if I want to be really sarcastic? .... But they left countless countries and regions in utter chaos.

However, it keeps the war machinery with all its lobbyists happy. The US has over 50 bases in the region, utterly overkill but again the Benjamins are more important.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Do you believe this afghanistan war is winnable?

If I was american, after 18 years I'd want out, some fox presenter yesterday was making positive comparisons with the cold war [which went on for 45 years at least] insinuating that if you want to win something you gotta be prepared for the long haul. The guest general jack keane was agreeing, and also saying if they leave, al-qaeda will return and use afghanistan as a base again to spring attacks on the usa.

I don't know what the overall cost is per year, but it must be millions of dollars and many serious casualties, it's not a featureless desert out there either, but terrain perfect for waging guerilla warfare.

Russia's got just as much to be fearful of al-qaeda style terrorists and geographically much nearer to afghanistan but if the usa left I doubt they'd be invading it as a way of solving the terrorist issue. So I don't buy that that is the real strategic aim of being out there as general keane asserted.

The absolute majority including the leader of the 9-11 attackers were well educated Saudi-Arabian citizens!!!!

 

[Steviedoo]

Mr Trump doubling down on his Alabama claim yesterday with his edited video. Can this man do anything that doesn’t make him look so foolish and petty? Just move on. Get over it. But nope, no argument is too small or too pathetic for this man if he thinks it makes him look bad.

He does not help his case.

He has become an international joke. And it doesn’t matter how he got there. Whether the overexposure and detailed reporting of the media. He’s there. He is a joke. No one takes this man seriously. He is a reflection of the people.

Let’s get another Republican candidate. And move on.

 

[mack341]

apparently trump has fired bolton! good move if true, wow never saw this coming

"I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House. I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration...

It has to be said, to date, trump has not been as hawkish as his predecessors, but time will tell I guess. Bolton would only be happy with the US involved in new military action somewhere, a strange man for trump to pick in the first place, colonel doug macgregor would probably be a better choice and fit with trump's outlook.

 

[vorcirion]

apparently trump has fired bolton! good move if true, wow never saw this coming

"I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House. I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration...

It has to be said, to date, trump has not been as hawkish as his predecessors, but time will tell I guess. Bolton would only be happy with the US involved in new military action somewhere, a strange man for trump to pick in the first place, colonel doug macgregor would probably be a better choice and fit with trump's outlook.

Wonder how long his 4th national security advisor will last. Anyone with a brain will disagree with Trump and resign shortly. Guess it will be acting national security advisor...maybe Trump Jr.!

 

[mack341]

Wonder how long his 4th national security advisor will last. Anyone with a brain will disagree with Trump and resign shortly. Guess it will be acting national security advisor...maybe Trump Jr.!

Yeah but I think bolton had a dangerous brain, I could be wrong but it seems a good call to me, it will be interesting to find out what they disagreed on.

If trump is going to fall out with the rinos and republican establishment, he may as well do it now while he still has the public's support...I don't know, still haven't fully made up my mind on trump, (I know you have years ago), but can't quite tell yet where he's coming from. Appointing bolton went against everything he said he stood for in the first place, so it's confusing, was he advised by someone to appoint him ...hopefully tucker will explain it all tonight.

edit: would be amazing if he's clearing the decks for general flynn to be reappointed, subject to being cleared in his ongoing trial/case, his new defence attorney sidney powell is one formidable lady. trump should've probably made her AG instead of barr the insider man.

 

[vorcirion]

Yeah but I think bolton had a dangerous brain, I could be wrong but it seems a good call to me, it will be interesting to find out what they disagreed on.

If trump is going to fall out with the rinos and republican establishment, he may as well do it now while he still has the public's support...I don't know, still haven't fully made up my mind on trump, (I know you have years ago), but can't quite tell yet where he's coming from. Appointing bolton went against everything he said he stood for in the first place, so it's confusing, was he advised by someone to appoint him ...hopefully tucker will explain it all tonight.

edit: would be amazing if he's clearing the decks for general flynn to be reappointed, subject to being cleared in his ongoing trial/case, his new defence attorney sidney powell is one formidable lady. trump should've probably made her AG instead of barr the insider man.

I don't know if you meant hiring flynn as a joke? Or why on earth would you want him to be reappointed? But would fit Trump's brand...hiring the best and the brightest (the most corrupt people possible).

 

[mack341]

I don't know if you meant hiring flynn as a joke? Or why on earth would you want him to be reappointed? But would fit Trump's brand...hiring the best and the brightest (the most corrupt people possible).

Well if his case is dropped and he is acquitted then he will be innocent? I'd have thought an innocent man being wrongly arrested and convicted would be something those on the left would oppose?

 

[vorcirion]

Well if his case is dropped and he is acquitted then he will be innocent? I'd have thought an innocent man being wrongly arrested and convicted would be something those on the left would oppose?

"Flynn pleaded guilty last December to one count of lying to the FBI. In his January 2017 interview with two FBI agents, he downplayed the substance of his interactions with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the 2016 presidential transition. Flynn had in fact asked Kislyak for certain policy responses from Russia following US sanctions and before a United Nations Security Council resolution vote. Flynn also lied about his lobbying work for Turkey throughout 2016."

"Because his guilty plea had been accepted by a different federal judge, who then appears to have recused himself from the case, Sullivan reviewed Flynn's crimes on Tuesday and made sure Flynn still wanted to admit his guilt.
"I would like to proceed, your honor," Flynn said about his guilty plea. "Because you're guilty of this offense?" Sullivan asked. "Yes, your honor," Flynn said, nodding."

And you say he's innocent? He admits his own guilt.

 

[mack341]

"Flynn pleaded guilty last December to one count of lying to the FBI. In his January 2017 interview with two FBI agents, he downplayed the substance of his interactions with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the 2016 presidential transition. Flynn had in fact asked Kislyak for certain policy responses from Russia following US sanctions and before a United Nations Security Council resolution vote. Flynn also lied about his lobbying work for Turkey throughout 2016."

"Because his guilty plea had been accepted by a different federal judge, who then appears to have recused himself from the case, Sullivan reviewed Flynn's crimes on Tuesday and made sure Flynn still wanted to admit his guilt.
"I would like to proceed, your honor," Flynn said about his guilty plea. "Because you're guilty of this offense?" Sullivan asked. "Yes, your honor," Flynn said, nodding."

And you say he's innocent? He admits his own guilt.

I clearly said if he is acquitted, it's still a possibility:

"There is egregious government misconduct and longtime suppression of Brady material that should’ve been provided to defense before there ever was a plea," Powell said during a hearing Tuesday, referring to a rule that requires the government to turn over evidence that could prove a defendant's innocence.

You just don't like him because he got on with trump and was going to be in his cabinet. Plenty have made up stories like steele and others, lied to mueller, the fbi and congress etc.. and not faced jail time

 

[vorcirion]

I clearly said if he is acquitted, it's still a possibility:

"There is egregious government misconduct and longtime suppression of Brady material that should’ve been provided to defense before there ever was a plea," Powell said during a hearing Tuesday, referring to a rule that requires the government to turn over evidence that could prove a defendant's innocence.

You just don't like him because he got on with trump and was going to be in his cabinet. Plenty have made up stories like steele and others, lied to mueller, the fbi and congress etc.. and not faced jail time

But he admitted his own guilt. If someone admits his own guilt to a crime...you really really shouldn't hire that kind of person as your national security advisor. If he's so innocent...he can always say: "not guilty". But he himself is saying: "guilty". I mean come on!

And if Barr would have a good case against someone...I'm sure he'd do Trump's bidding as always. Keep investigating the investigators all you want.
1 year and 4 months to go before Trump faces his own battle with the justice.

 

[mack341]

But he admitted his own guilt. If someone admits his own guilt to a crime...you really really shouldn't hire that kind of person as your national security advisor. If he's so innocent...he can always say: "not guilty". But he himself is saying: "guilty". I mean come on!

And if Barr would have a good case against someone...I'm sure he'd do Trump's bidding as always. Keep investigating the investigators all you want.
1 year and 4 months to go before Trump faces his own battle with the justice.

Have you heard of america's plea bargaining system, it's often the pragmatic thing to do, plead guilty and do less time. Jury's are often very partisan, for instance would he really get a fair hearing from someone like yourself? (politically opposed and vehemently anti trump)

I must admit I don't know all the ins and outs of the flynn case, but it seems to me those on the hillary side get let off, and those on the trump side, like roger stone, get the book thrown at them.

 

[vorcirion]

Have you heard of america's plea bargaining system, it's often the pragmatic thing to do, plead guilty and do less time. Jury's are often very partisan, for instance would he really get a fair hearing from someone like yourself? (politically opposed and vehemently anti trump)

I must admit I don't know all the ins and outs of the flynn case, but it seems to me those on the hillary side get let off, and those on the trump side, like roger stone, get the book thrown at them.

Flynn is white. He'd get a fair hearing just like Manafort did. Though one of the trumpsters helped him to avoid few charges. My bias is clear for a good reason. They wouldn't select me as a juror for sure.

And you don't need to know anything else than what Flynn told himself: "Guilty". That should be enough. If you were the president...would you hire someone to a very important role that includes all kinds of classified material, if he has plead guilty in a criminal trial? Doesn't that sound like too big of a risk to you?

Republicans sure keep trying to find all kinds of guilty people from the democrats...they just never get there Maybe because they aren't criminal unlike Trump's side is.

 

[mack341]

I don't think trump will reappoint flynn, I doubt he would be able to get congress/senate to agree the appointment, but he might have been a very good national security adviser. Flynn got to the rank of 3 star general, so was trusted plenty, before that is he accepted the offer to work with trump...

 

[Harry_BKK]

Geez mack...you still think Mr T has a plan or is some genius chess player.

Fact is, Mr T wants a Nobel Peace prize at any cost to equal Obama. He lies himself to an equal or better footing compared to Obama for the all other aspects (economy, immigration, stock market, jobs etc) but he can't do that with the Nobel prize.

Three issues will possibly get him one - NK, Afghanistan and Iran

NK - he is in "love" with Kim and allows him more than his predecessors just to keep the illusion that there might be a deal in the making. Kim still enriches Uranium, builds and tests missiles (in violation of UN resolutions) and Mr T is just fine. Anything goes that will keep his dream alive of getting that coveted prize.

Afghanistan - ending that war would not only put Nobel in reach but almost 100% ensure his reelection. Bolton was strictly against the deal with the Taliban and even more so to have them in the US.

Hence, Mr T got rid of him as he is of no use to him anymore for his quest to get the Nobel prize or reelected. Very soon, Bolton will be a "low-level coffee boy" who is "dumb as a rock".

Really very simple and obvious if you observe how Mr T ticks.

 

[mack341]

Geez mack...you still think Mr T has a plan or is some genius chess player.

Fact is, Mr T wants a Nobel Peace prize at any cost to equal Obama. He lies himself to an equal or better footing compared to Obama for the all other aspects (economy, immigration, stock market, jobs etc) but he can't do that with the Nobel prize.

Three issues will possibly get him one - NK, Afghanistan and Iran

NK - he is in "love" with Kim and allows him more than his predecessors just to keep the illusion that there might be a deal in the making. Kim still enriches Uranium, builds and tests missiles (in violation of UN resolutions) and Mr T is just fine. Anything goes that will keep his dream alive of getting that coveted prize.

Afghanistan - ending that war would not only put Nobel in reach but almost 100% ensure his reelection. Bolton was strictly against the deal with the Taliban and even more so to have them in the US.

Hence, Mr T got rid of him as he is of no use to him anymore for his quest to get the Nobel prize or reelected. Very soon, Bolton will be a "low-level coffee boy" who is "dumb as a rock".

Really very simple and obvious if you observe how Mr T ticks.

Harry, trump's got more chance of being the first president to set foot on the moon than he has of liberal scandinavians awarding him a nobel peace prize, he's not that stupid to think he'd ever be considered surely? [Although saying that henry kissinger got one, so anything is possible I guess] No doubt he'd like one, but I think that second term is more on his mind.

His rally the other day was quite good, he's very relaxed amongst the average people, by and large they've had a crummy deal over the years and he recognises that. Whereas many politicians from the left want to lecture and boss people about, trying to interfere in their lives all the time.

Beto's speech the other day was embarrasing, attempting to relate to poor people, not saying he doesn't mean well but it didn't come across as authentic. That's the problem the left will always have, coming across as holier than thou, they can't say one thing out of line or even make many jokes unless extremely careful, they always have to be on a virtue mission.

I think elizabeth warren is probably a genuine do-gooder, she's the left's best chance, it's not an act with her as I think it is with many of the others. It will be then up to americans to assess whether the financial figures add up and they want a more socialist approach to policies...

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry, trump's got more chance of being the first president to set foot on the moon than he has of liberal scandinavians awarding him a nobel peace prize, he's not that stupid to think he'd ever be considered surely? [Although saying that henry kissinger got one, so anything is possible I guess] No doubt he'd like one, but I think that second term is more on his mind.

His rally the other day was quite good, he's very relaxed amongst the average people, by and large they've had a crummy deal over the years and he recognises that. Whereas many politicians from the left want to lecture and boss people about, trying to interfere in their lives all the time.

Beto's speech the other day was embarrasing, attempting to relate to poor people, not saying he doesn't mean well but it didn't come across as authentic. That's the problem the left will always have, coming across as holier than thou, they can't say one thing out of line or even make many jokes unless extremely careful, they always have to be on a virtue mission.

I think elizabeth warren is probably a genuine do-gooder, she's the left's best chance, it's not an act with her as I think it is with many of the others. It will be then up to americans to assess whether the financial figures add up and they want a more socialist approach to policies...

So you liked him lying and denigrating people throughout the rally? I am pretty flabbergasted mate or maybe I shouldn't.

If he is relaxed, which I have yet to see, then only because people treat him like the "chosen one".

 

[Jammie_Ch]

North Korea is a pure mystery to all other countries.

 

[mack341]

So you liked him lying and denigrating people throughout the rally? I am pretty flabbergasted mate or maybe I shouldn't.

If he is relaxed, which I have yet to see, then only because people treat him like the "chosen one".

The bit I watched he was denigrating the MS-13 crime gang, and how ICE are doing a brave job of tackling them. And also how the TPP would've been bad for jobs, worse than nafta.

I didn't watch the whole rally through, I'm too old and cynical to watch more than a few minutes of a political rally. I'm normally able to make a judgement as to how it's going in that time, the response of the audience, the confidence and ease of the speaker etc... and this one seemed 'quite good', better than the last one, he seemed to be more on his game.

If it was going badly, I'd probably have watched a bit more out of interest, but this seemed to be business as usual, the crowd enjoying and lapping it up.

'Relaxed' in terms of comfortable in that setting among what looked to me like blue collar america, many successful business people from a life of privilege, billionaires etc... would struggle in this situation, but trump is down to earth enough to get along with all sorts.

Elizabeth warren is quite down to earth also and comfortable around people, I think in today's social media world you need to have this quality as a politician more than in the past. Theresa May is the opposite, awkward around people, robotic, and only reading from a prepared script.

 

[Harry_BKK]

The bit I watched he was denigrating the MS-13 crime gang, and how ICE are doing a brave job of tackling them. And also how the TPP would've been bad for jobs, worse than nafta.

I didn't watch the whole rally through, I'm too old and cynical to watch more than a few minutes of a political rally. I'm normally able to make a judgement as to how it's going in that time, the response of the audience, the confidence and ease of the speaker etc... and this one seemed 'quite good', better than the last one, he seemed to be more on his game.

If it was going badly, I'd probably have watched a bit more out of interest, but this seemed to be business as usual, the crowd enjoying and lapping it up.

'Relaxed' in terms of comfortable in that setting among what looked to me like blue collar america, many successful business people from a life of privilege, billionaires etc... would struggle in this situation, but trump is down to earth enough to get along with all sorts.

Elizabeth warren is quite down to earth also and comfortable around people, I think in today's social media world you need to have this quality as a politician more than in the past. Theresa May is the opposite, awkward around people, robotic, and only reading from a prepared script.

I give you one example that shows the hypocrisy and should convince even a die-hard fan like you.

At the rally, he asked the audience regarding bringing back manufacturing jobs (of course, lying through his teeth prior to the questions):

"What do you like more?"
- "Made in America" - little applause
- "Made in the USA" - the crowd goes wild

Hilarious in the first place, because anyone with a brain sees as both meaning the same in general talk (not geographically).

Second, just a few days ago Mr T's family launched a new line of branded merchandise to have the blinded spend even their last cent on Mr T and most are marked with bold letters: "Decorated in the USA" - so all is done in countries from China to Bangladesh and a US part-time worker on minimum wage irons the T logo on to the clothes, etc. So much for "Made in the USA".

 

[geordiecolin]

"I am the chosen one!" Mr T said yesterday! View attachment 113182

Seriously though, anyone still thinking he is fit to be president or anything else that requires some responsibility after yesterday's instalment of his trash TV show "Chopper Talk", is either completely deaf or simply does not want to admit that it was a complete mistake to vote for him.

But you can see how is already hedging for a possible election loss next year, blaming all and everyone but himself for any trouble or problems.

Trump is just a distraction the same as the last half dozen or more Presidents have been to distract from the real government who are there behind the sceens no mater which party or president they have. The left and right are just two wings of the same bird.

 

[mack341]

I give you one example that shows the hypocrisy and should convince even a die-hard fan like you.

At the rally, he asked the audience regarding bringing back manufacturing jobs (of course, lying through his teeth prior to the questions):

"What do you like more?"
- "Made in America" - little applause
- "Made in the USA" - the crowd goes wild

Hilarious in the first place, because anyone with a brain sees as both meaning the same in general talk (not geographically).

Second, just a few days ago Mr T's family launched a new line of branded merchandise to have the blinded spend even their last cent on Mr T and most are marked with bold letters: "Decorated in the USA" - so all is done in countries from China to Bangladesh and a US part-time worker on minimum wage irons the T logo on to the clothes, etc. So much for "Made in the USA".

Yeah that is pretty bad re the shirts, you'd think a shirt made in the usa would still be profitable just a bit less, so it's just hypocrisy not to get the whole thing made in the usa. I bet though he doesn't get challenged on it by the dems or msm, when it's really an open goal for them to use in the debates.

We used to have 'made in england' on items, then it became uk. Though it's rare to see any in the shops nowadays, other than food and odd bits and pieces.

America could have had so much more quality employment on the basis of that 'made in usa' mark, would the average person be prepared to pay more for levi jeans actually made in america, I think they would but I guess it's how much more.

I remember reading bill bryson's book on the US when he said their consumer products like tv's and vhs recorders were a bit of a joke in the 80's and that's why the japanese cornered the market for consumer electronics, but once computers took off they became leaders again, commodore, apple, microsoft etc.. If you have a high population and the USA is 3rd on the list behind china and india, I think you're going to need a healthy manufacturing sector otherwise the economy is unbalanced, too many imports and not enough exports...all I ever hear about is exporting soya beans how many people does that employ, growing vast fields of soya and using machines to harvest it??

You would have to pay a higher premium for products made in the US but germany still does this and it works for them. Although I've noticed quite a lot of bosch's lower end range of products are 'made in china', [designed in germany and still good products.]

I didn't quite understand the trade imbalance between the US and china, but apparently a lot of the products sold in places like walmart are made in china, not just the branded goods like nike etc..and walmart put out of business many smaller independent shops, which employed more people. Whereas I believe some walmart employees are subsidised by the govt with additional social security benefits because their wages are not enough to live on. Not 100% certain on that though.

 

[geordiecolin]

Good luck slowing down mass-consumerism, every dipstick needs the latest gadget or lifetime companion fused to their hand to survive.

It's all very well people getting their knickers in a twist from the safe space Twittersphere but God forbid they have to make a pro-active choice to bin their tech toys.

My phone is so old that I don't use it or take it out, to spare it ridicule and humiliation from passers-by. I think Adam & Eve had one of these:

View attachment 113340

Awesome piece of tech......in 2006

Guess that qualifies me as the lowest carbon footprint-leaving poster on CM, possibly the internet

We are being more and more controlled via social media and communications technology. The new 5G phone is another huge step in that direction. 5G is not just a natural progression from 4G at all. It is on a different frequency. It doesn't travel or go through solid objects very well. So we will have boxes in most streets broadcasting like a weapon-and the frequency is used as a weapon in much stronger doses by the military.

4G is already causing DNA damage,cancer and mental health issues. There is increasing evidence of these. 5G pjone tech has not even been safety tested despite it being a military weapon in higher doses. They know exactly how it can as is used as a weapon
There is no doubt about us getting more and more controlled by the powers that be

 

[goatwack]

We are being more and more controlled via social media and communications technology. The new 5G phone is another huge step in that direction. 5G is not just a natural progression from 4G at all. It is on a different frequency. It doesn't travel or go through solid objects very well. So we will have boxes in most streets broadcasting like a weapon-and the frequency is used as a weapon in much stronger doses by the military.

4G is already causing DNA damage,cancer and mental health issues. There is increasing evidence of these. 5G has not even been safety tested despite it being a military weapon in higher doses.
There is no doubt about us getting more and more controlled by the powers that be

Someone's been bingeing on The X-Files/ 24 boxsets

 

[geordiecolin]

Someone's been bingeing on The X-Files/ 24 boxsets

The Matrix is becoming real

 

[goatwack]

The Matrix is becoming real

I know it's the End Of Days, ever since we let Rafa go

 

[geordiecolin]

I know it's the End Of Days, ever since we let Rafa go

We squeal like pigs about it but we still keep lining the FCB's pockets

 

[geordiecolin]

Here is just an idea of what I am referring to regarding 5G and they have the ability to ramp up and mess about with the frequencies

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

And they can switch off your electric and gas via the smart meter technology, life is just going to be swell for the coming generations, whenever you leave the sanctuary of your freezing cold house you'll have your balls and brain microwaved by military grade wi fi

 

[mack341]

We squeal like pigs about it but we still keep lining the FCB's pockets

fat conniving bugger ? or stronger than that

 

[Kroffe]

Sure buddy, its the lightbulbs fault.
The fact that you ARE orange has nothing to do with it.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Sure buddy, its the lightbulbs fault.
The fact that you ARE orange has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, he's getting worse by the day. The entire speech was hilarious, full of lies as always and he barely spoke one coherent sentence. Here some examples:

"We are really -- if you look at what's going on in certain countries in the Middle East and you look at the straits and you see the ships and they're being taken and they're being -- not too often by the way because frankly Iran is a much different country than it was two-and-a-half years ago."

This was the best:

"We've had tremendous success with opioid."

Or this one (that Rockefeller was from New York):

"I don't think Rockefeller can beat me in Texas. The real Rockefeller, the first Rockefeller. I think he'd have a hard time beating me in Texas."

 

[Harry_BKK]

Yeah that is pretty bad re the shirts, you'd think a shirt made in the usa would still be profitable just a bit less, so it's just hypocrisy not to get the whole thing made in the usa. I bet though he doesn't get challenged on it by the dems or msm, when it's really an open goal for them to use in the debates.

We used to have 'made in england' on items, then it became uk. Though it's rare to see any in the shops nowadays, other than food and odd bits and pieces.

America could have had so much more quality employment on the basis of that 'made in usa' mark, would the average person be prepared to pay more for levi jeans actually made in america, I think they would but I guess it's how much more.

I remember reading bill bryson's book on the US when he said their consumer products like tv's and vhs recorders were a bit of a joke in the 80's and that's why the japanese cornered the market for consumer electronics, but once computers took off they became leaders again, commodore, apple, microsoft etc.. If you have a high population and the USA is 3rd on the list behind china and india, I think you're going to need a healthy manufacturing sector otherwise the economy is unbalanced, too many imports and not enough exports...all I ever hear about is exporting soya beans how many people does that employ, growing vast fields of soya and using machines to harvest it??

You would have to pay a higher premium for products made in the US but germany still does this and it works for them. Although I've noticed quite a lot of bosch's lower end range of products are 'made in china', [designed in germany and still good products.]

I didn't quite understand the trade imbalance between the US and china, but apparently a lot of the products sold in places like walmart are made in china, not just the branded goods like nike etc..and walmart put out of business many smaller independent shops, which employed more people. Whereas I believe some walmart employees are subsidised by the govt with additional social security benefits because their wages are not enough to live on. Not 100% certain on that though.

One more example as it is about one host from your "beloved" Faux News channel. She said this about two months ago on the channel:

"As it stands, products used for government projects can carry the 'Made in America' logo with parts made of 50% foreign components but not under this president. Trump signed an executive order raising the percentage of American components to 75%. That's right baby, made in the U.S.A. He talks the talk and walks the walk. In America, it's Americans first. We should come first in our own dang country and under this president, we do."

A few weeks ago she launched her own athleisure line Freedom, all in red and blue, covered with stars etc. and you can carry a concealed weapon. Now guess where the clothes are made to 100%? I give you three chances to guess it right.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CHINA

The same like her idol, lying into the face of the people and they still cheer and support her and him. Both don't give a toss about anyone but their Benjamins. When will the supporters - and you mack - and all other cheerers understand that?

This was her pathetic answer when she was forced to make a statement. Question is what can they diligently work towards to? The wages are not gonna drop in the US to bring the manufacturing price down to the Chinese level (or many other low-wage countries). Simple lies again, and people still buying her stuff.

Why did she not wait with the launch of her line until it can be "Made in America" if she's so much about America First?

 

[mack341]

One more example as it is about one host from your "beloved" Faux News channel. She said this about two months ago on the channel:

"As it stands, products used for government projects can carry the 'Made in America' logo with parts made of 50% foreign components but not under this president. Trump signed an executive order raising the percentage of American components to 75%. That's right baby, made in the U.S.A. He talks the talk and walks the walk. In America, it's Americans first. We should come first in our own dang country and under this president, we do."

A few weeks ago she launched her own athleisure line Freedom, all in red and blue, covered with stars etc. and you can carry a concealed weapon. Now guess where the clothes are made to 100%? I give you three chances to guess it right.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CHINA

The same like her idol, lying into the face of the people and they still cheer and support her and him. Both don't give a toss about anyone but their Benjamins. When will the supporters - and you mack - and all other cheerers understand that?

This was her pathetic answer when she was forced to make a statement. Question is what can they diligently work towards to? The wages are not gonna drop in the US to bring the manufacturing price down to the Chinese level (or many other low-wage countries). Simple lies again, and people still buying her stuff.

Why did she not wait with the launch of her line until it can be "Made in America" if she's so much about America First?
View attachment 114072

I've never come across this lady tomi lahren, I tend not to stray too far from the big four, even then I don't give 'faux news' a free pass, there are lots of these emojis appearing in my thoughts sometimes during viewing the shows and clips, for instance Lou Dobbs doing a thankyou piece to camera for john bolton for his patriotic service or something that got a big , bolton's straight outta the swamp as far as I'm concerned and will be heading back there asap. Laura going on about being energy independent when talking about non renewable fossil fuel and how fracking has enabled this amazing achievement, etc etc...

I do detect a fair bit of 'duping the public' but then when you look at the other side, the democrats, the alternative is very mixed up to me and mainly about giving out 'this and that' free money/beneficial treatment to every minority category/situation you can think of. I've only caught a 30 second montage of the dem debate from the other evening, I'll be looking for a longer breakdown...but so far all I heard was 'on the first day of my office, I will bring in 'xyz' for 'fill in the gap' minority concern group'.

Whereas I think some of the main planks of trump's 2016 campaign, which he is basically re-using for 2020, would, if done, make a difference to the quality of life for the majority of americans, if he'd added more on training and education for kids to improve opportunities that would be a good idea.

There's still things I don't like, the trampling over of environmental concerns with things like fracking, but not the climate change pc stuff which seem to forget and gloss over india and china's contribution to world pollution. Plus the tax cuts for the mega rich. He is a bit too much of a 'red in tooth and claw' capitalist for my liking, but if the alternative is all about identity politics, what's the choice for socially conservative people who are not into extreme capitalism [which is basically my political viewpoint and probably many people here in the uk and in the USA]. We've also got a big student loan issue here in the uk, which I think originated as a 'solution' to finance further education in the US, and the dems want to lower the interest rate charged, whereas I'd probably be more concerned with the actual high cost of the education/tuition charged by universities etc..it seems excessive to me, is there a shortage of teachers ??

 

[Harry_BKK]

I've never come across this lady tomi lahren, I tend not to stray too far from the big four, even then I don't give 'faux news' a free pass, there are lots of these emojis appearing in my thoughts sometimes during viewing the shows and clips, for instance Lou Dobbs doing a thankyou piece to camera for john bolton for his patriotic service or something that got a big , bolton's straight outta the swamp as far as I'm concerned and will be heading back there asap. Laura going on about being energy independent when talking about non renewable fossil fuel and how fracking has enabled this amazing achievement, etc etc...

I do detect a fair bit of 'duping the public' but then when you look at the other side, the democrats, the alternative is very mixed up to me and mainly about giving out 'this and that' free money/beneficial treatment to every minority category/situation you can think of. I've only caught a 30 second montage of the dem debate from the other evening, I'll be looking for a longer breakdown...but so far all I heard was 'on the first day of my office, I will bring in 'xyz' for 'fill in the gap' minority concern group'.

Whereas I think some of the main planks of trump's 2016 campaign, which he is basically re-using for 2020, would, if done, make a difference to the quality of life for the majority of americans, if he'd added more on training and education for kids to improve opportunities that would be a good idea.

There's still things I don't like, the trampling over of environmental concerns with things like fracking, but not the climate change pc stuff which seem to forget and gloss over india and china's contribution to world pollution. Plus the tax cuts for the mega rich. He is a bit too much of a 'red in tooth and claw' capitalist for my liking, but if the alternative is all about identity politics, what's the choice for socially conservative people who are not into extreme capitalism [which is basically my political viewpoint and probably many people here in the uk and in the USA]. We've also got a big student loan issue here in the uk, which I think originated as a 'solution' to finance further education in the US, and the dems want to lower the interest rate charged, whereas I'd probably be more concerned with the actual high cost of the education/tuition charged by universities etc..it seems excessive to me, is there a shortage of teachers ??

I've never come across this lady tomi lahren, I tend not to stray too far from the big four, even then I don't give 'faux news' a free pass, there are lots of these emojis appearing in my thoughts sometimes during viewing the shows and clips, for instance Lou Dobbs doing a thankyou piece to camera for john bolton for his patriotic service or something that got a big , bolton's straight outta the swamp as far as I'm concerned and will be heading back there asap. Laura going on about being energy independent when talking about non renewable fossil fuel and how fracking has enabled this amazing achievement, etc etc...

I do detect a fair bit of 'duping the public' but then when you look at the other side, the democrats, the alternative is very mixed up to me and mainly about giving out 'this and that' free money/beneficial treatment to every minority category/situation you can think of. I've only caught a 30 second montage of the dem debate from the other evening, I'll be looking for a longer breakdown...but so far all I heard was 'on the first day of my office, I will bring in 'xyz' for 'fill in the gap' minority concern group'.

Whereas I think some of the main planks of trump's 2016 campaign, which he is basically re-using for 2020, would, if done, make a difference to the quality of life for the majority of americans, if he'd added more on training and education for kids to improve opportunities that would be a good idea.

There's still things I don't like, the trampling over of environmental concerns with things like fracking, but not the climate change pc stuff which seem to forget and gloss over india and china's contribution to world pollution. Plus the tax cuts for the mega rich. He is a bit too much of a 'red in tooth and claw' capitalist for my liking, but if the alternative is all about identity politics, what's the choice for socially conservative people who are not into extreme capitalism [which is basically my political viewpoint and probably many people here in the uk and in the USA]. We've also got a big student loan issue here in the uk, which I think originated as a 'solution' to finance further education in the US, and the dems want to lower the interest rate charged, whereas I'd probably be more concerned with the actual high cost of the education/tuition charged by universities etc..it seems excessive to me, is there a shortage of teachers ??

Well, mack, I think we covered the Benjamins that drive Mr T and anyone else around him.

Time to give you some food for thought about your steadfast opinion that Obama was a warmonger but Mr T is is such a peace-loving man and that he works so hard to end all wars. Please read this article, all well-researched with marked sources etc. from a 50-year old non-profit organization.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

And one more fact, Mr T has ordered more drone strikes in less than 3 years than Obama in all 8 years. He also stopped publishing official numbers for civilian casulaties by revoking a policy Obama had set.

I think the numbers speak for themselves and clearly show that Mr T has no intention whatsoever to end any war. Not that I am surprised.

 

[mack341]

Harry you enjoyed my last post so much you've quoted it twice

You might not like this one so much though I think as you mentioned previously when this drone topic come up, Trump has delegated the decision making to the in field officers/generals on the ground.

I suspect he did that as he doesn't want the consequences, like civilian wedding parties being massacred by a drone, weighing on his conscience but he cannot override the military industrial complex, he's more or less a passenger rather than the driver, it has deep ties to the republican establishment and he needs to get along with the senators, congressmen in his party etc..

If he said tomorrow we're pulling out of afghanistan, lock stock and barrel, there'd probably be a mutiny in his party to get him removed from office.

It is complicated, Trump in some ways is difficult to read, but at the rallies he seems sincere in wishing to withdraw troops and no longer be the world policeman, no other recent president has even said those things, ' liberal interventionism' has been the policy for decades. Hillary would've continued that, maybe some of the 2020 dem candidates will too.

The above is just one theory or view of it, alternatively trump could be just as much a warmonger as previous presidents but the public support isn't there for more large scale military activity/action, hence the iran situation de-escalated. If trump wins a 2nd term and has some sort of majority in the two houses then maybe we'll see a more warlike trump, and he'll ramp things up in places like afghanistan, however I just feel it's unlikely, it doesn't fit in with 'america first'.

The khashoggi murder to me was a shocker and trump should've been pushed on that more by opponents, to his credit Lindsey Graham was outraged by that event, again the dems don't go there in their debates, but if they get office it's a question for them too. Trump did want better relations with russia and was attacked by all sides, republicans, the msm and democrats, he tries to do a difficult peace deal with NK and is accused of being a kim lover

 

[vorcirion]

Harry you enjoyed my last post so much you've quoted it twice

You might not like this one so much though I think as you mentioned previously when this drone topic come up, Trump has delegated the decision making to the in field officers/generals on the ground.

I suspect he did that as he doesn't want the consequences, like civilian wedding parties being massacred by a drone, weighing on his conscience but he cannot override the military industrial complex, he's more or less a passenger rather than the driver, it has deep ties to the republican establishment and he needs to get along with the senators, congressmen in his party etc..

If he said tomorrow we're pulling out of afghanistan, lock stock and barrel, there'd probably be a mutiny in his party to get him removed from office.

It is complicated, Trump in some ways is difficult to read, but at the rallies he seems sincere in wishing to withdraw troops and no longer be the world policeman, no other recent president has even said those things, ' liberal interventionism' has been the policy for decades. Hillary would've continued that, maybe some of the 2020 dem candidates will too.

The above is just one theory or view of it, alternatively trump could be just as much a warmonger as previous presidents but the public support isn't there for more large scale military activity/action, hence the iran situation de-escalated. If trump wins a 2nd term and has some sort of majority in the two houses then maybe we'll see a more warlike trump, and he'll ramp things up in places like afghanistan, however I just feel it's unlikely, it doesn't fit in with 'america first'.

The khashoggi murder to me was a shocker and trump should've been pushed on that more by opponents, to his credit Lindsey Graham was outraged by that event, again the dems don't go there in their debates, but if they get office it's a question for them too. Trump did want better relations with russia and was attacked by all sides, republicans, the msm and democrats, he tries to do a difficult peace deal with NK and is accused of being a kim lover

With Trump it's pointless to listen what he says. Usually the opposite is true with him. If he says that there has been tremendous success in _______. There probably hasn't been. If he says that he has never heard of something...he always knows what he has done wrong and does his pathethic lying routine.

His america first is a joke too really. What kind of policies has he done to improve american life? Tax cuts to rich people, healthcare away from his supporters basically, manufacturing going down too. Remove all regulation so companies can destroy whatever environment there's left. Bye bye clean water act.
His endless trade wars, his pointless diplomacy (NK, Iran, China, Afghanistan), scaring people in Alabama about the hurricane and wanting to fire the scientists who give accurate information.

Trump isn't difficult to read. You just need to stop listening what he says and see what he actually does. Pretty sure everyone already knows what he's for...his rhetoric might sound nice in some situations, like pulling troops out of wherever. But he's a completely useless leader who gets nothing done and he's escalating situation in Iran and selling much more weaponry to Saudi-Arabia. Does nothing to stop the war in Yemen etc. And when there's so much chaos and war in the Middle East...you know where those refugees come from there. To Europe of course! At least you'll have more to complain in UK again when more refugees are coming.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry you enjoyed my last post so much you've quoted it twice

You might not like this one so much though I think as you mentioned previously when this drone topic come up, Trump has delegated the decision making to the in field officers/generals on the ground.

I suspect he did that as he doesn't want the consequences, like civilian wedding parties being massacred by a drone, weighing on his conscience but he cannot override the military industrial complex, he's more or less a passenger rather than the driver, it has deep ties to the republican establishment and he needs to get along with the senators, congressmen in his party etc..

If he said tomorrow we're pulling out of afghanistan, lock stock and barrel, there'd probably be a mutiny in his party to get him removed from office.

It is complicated, Trump in some ways is difficult to read, but at the rallies he seems sincere in wishing to withdraw troops and no longer be the world policeman, no other recent president has even said those things, ' liberal interventionism' has been the policy for decades. Hillary would've continued that, maybe some of the 2020 dem candidates will too.

The above is just one theory or view of it, alternatively trump could be just as much a warmonger as previous presidents but the public support isn't there for more large scale military activity/action, hence the iran situation de-escalated. If trump wins a 2nd term and has some sort of majority in the two houses then maybe we'll see a more warlike trump, and he'll ramp things up in places like afghanistan, however I just feel it's unlikely, it doesn't fit in with 'america first'.

The khashoggi murder to me was a shocker and trump should've been pushed on that more by opponents, to his credit Lindsey Graham was outraged by that event, again the dems don't go there in their debates, but if they get office it's a question for them too. Trump did want better relations with russia and was attacked by all sides, republicans, the msm and democrats, he tries to do a difficult peace deal with NK and is accused of being a kim lover

LOOL... couldn't edit the post anymore

You always find an excuse for Mr T, aren't you?

He increased the military budget to the highest ever. And keeps emphasizing that he alone makes all decisions in his administration.

Nah, your "he's more or less a passenger rather than the driver" doesn't wash in this case. He seriously asked a drone operator why he wasn't firing when that guy was waiting for some civilians to move away from the target. He also asked why nukes have not been used in some places.

I can tell you that ending the wars would have only one reason, to get him a Nobel. The troops don't really bother him. Why has he then increased the troop levels in virtually every part of the world? Out of peace-loving plans and that he wants to bring troops home?

He knows that many of his supporters, who are from the poorer classes in the US, have kids in the army because for those people the army is often the only way to get some sort of higher education and a safe income. So of course, he promised everything they wanted to hear, knowing very well that he was lying into their face.

What exactly has he done with North Korea? He has been played like a fiddle because they still enrich nuclear material, further their missile technology, fire missiles in breach of UN resolutions, Kim still kills his own people at will or lets them starve etc..... only now with the silent approval from Mr T. The only thing that might be different is that they drop the test missiles in the short-distance range instead of letting them fly over Japan. Nobody knows if those are short or long range.

 

[mack341]

Some fair comments in those two posts above which I can't disagree with, it'll be interesting to see who replaces bolton.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Some fair comments in those two posts above which I can't disagree with, it'll be interesting to see who replaces bolton.

My guess is it will be another one who likes to brown his nose!