North Korea and US politics

[slotplayer]

The House of Zod is Falling Baby!

 

[goatwack]

Couldn't quite believe what I was witnessing earlier today on Sky News, as Trump basically excused the actions of Anne Sacoolas, a diplomat's wife who ran over 19- year old Harry Dunn because she was driving on the wrong side of the road.

She has since slunk off to the U.S under diplomatic immunity. Kind of a big deal right here right now, but we all know what will inevitably (not) happen

 

[Harry_BKK]

Couldn't quite believe what I was witnessing earlier today on Sky News, as Trump basically excused the actions of Anne Sacoolas, a diplomat's wife who ran over 19- year old Harry Dunn because she was driving on the wrong side of the road.

She has since slunk off to the U.S under diplomatic immunity. Kind of a big deal right here right now, but we all know what will inevitably (not) happen

View attachment 115227

The usual garbled talk that is at the level of less than a 5th-grader. No coherent sentence whatsoever. Ducking and swerving around instead of giving a clear answer.

If find the "immunity" thing for diplomats is rather a slap in the face for us normal mortals. Especially because it extends to family members of the ambassador/etc.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Couldn't quite believe what I was witnessing earlier today on Sky News, as Trump basically excused the actions of Anne Sacoolas, a diplomat's wife who ran over 19- year old Harry Dunn because she was driving on the wrong side of the road.

She has since slunk off to the U.S under diplomatic immunity. Kind of a big deal right here right now, but we all know what will inevitably (not) happen

View attachment 115227

There was a similar case here in Singapore and Romania actually arrested the guy and sent him back to Singapore for the trial. So, it can be done.

 

[goatwack]

There was a similar case here in Singapore and Romania actually arrested the guy and sent him back to Singapore for the trial. So, it can be done.

Oh for sure, it's not 'un-doable'

Just the fact that Trump is blatantly partisan, doesn't acknowledge the severity of her deeds, won't exactly extradite her, she won't turn herself in & she has the moral compass of a balloon

 

[mack341]

from the sun:

"Jonathan Saccolas is a US diplomat and alleged NSA spy.

Anne was able to claim diplomatic immunity after a special deal was put in place between the UK and the US which gives staff and their families based at RAF Croughton diplomatic immunity.
Usually, diplomatic immunity only covers those diplomats and their dependants based in London.
The special arrangement has been in place as early as 1994 for this particular base"


Funny how the uk is bending over backwards to extradite Assange for mainly being a conduit for whistleblowing...double standards, the hallmark of all corrupt systems and countries.

 

[Steviedoo]

How many isis supporters have escaped...

Mr tough on terror...

If Obama had done this they would have impeached him so fast.


Trump created a mess and now mr hero will go ahead and impose sanctions ...it’s laughable...

 

[Harry_BKK]

How many isis supporters have escaped...

Mr tough on terror...

If Obama had done this they would have impeached him so fast.


Trump created a mess and now mr hero will go ahead and impose sanctions ...it’s laughable...

Same old con trick from Mr T. ..... Create a crisis to appear as the saviour of the world.

Just imagine what Mnuchin said (ordered by Mr T): "We can shut down Turkey's economy if we need to." That's what they tell a NATO member! They first let Turkey attack and slaughter the Kurds and after the damage is done, they want to impose sanctions. That is some logic!

Who wants to be an ally of the US when you listen to statements like that?

It was also interesting to see how Mr T presented himself as the saviour after agreeing to a "part deal" with the Chinese. It is now, of course, the "greatest and biggest deal ever". However, that is exactly where they were in March / April 2019. It's not even on paper yet, then both countries have to sign it and Congress has to ratify it. They signed NAFTA2 one year ago and it is still not ratified by the US or Canada.

From what I read the pre-agreement is pretty much the "small steps" approach the Chinese have been doing the last few decades since they were allowed to join the WTO. Something anyone else would have been able to achieve, but without the upheaval from Mr T tariff gambit. Funny is also that Mnuchin, Lightizer and Mr T only mentioned what the Chinese "agreed" to but not a single word what the US has offered other than to put the last 5% raise tariffs on hold.

Looks to me like Mr T agreed to something, anything just so he can present some sort of "win". He's terribly desperate for one after being rebuked by seven or eight court decisions last week alone.

 

[Harry_BKK]

This just made me laugh this morning.

Mr T a few days ago: "I don't know the gentlemen (Parnas and Fruman), you have to ask Rudy."

For somebody who claims to have the best brain and memory, he sure forgets a lot of things, preferably exactly then when it is some negative for him.

A pic of him and Parnas from 2014, FB can be a real treasure trove sometimes.

Parnas said he sold Mr T condos when Fred (Mr T's father) was still in charge. The poster of the FB post says he deals in gold, oil and diamonds. Put the two together and you've got the poster-perfect case for money laundering. And Mr T looks like he was/is not just a side note. These people had dinner at the White House with him (I wonder if Mr T served again burgers and fries?! ). Which "normal" person gets that privilege?

 

[Harry_BKK]

How many isis supporters have escaped...

Mr tough on terror...

If Obama had done this they would have impeached him so fast.


Trump created a mess and now mr hero will go ahead and impose sanctions ...it’s laughable...

Found this very fitting comment on another forum:

"Mr T pulled 1,000 troops from Syria to end these "endless wars", then sent 2,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, in case there is war."

I am sure Mr T will explain it with the "alternative fact" that Saudi Arabia helped the US in WWII and stormed the beaches of Normandy side by side with US soldiers.

 

[pinnit2014]

Found this very fitting comment on another forum:

"Mr T pulled 1,000 troops from Syria to end these "endless wars", then sent 2,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, in case there is war."

I am sure Mr T will explain it with the "alternative fact" that Saudi Arabia helped the US in WWII and stormed the beaches of Normandy side by side with US soldiers.

Maybe he’s read The Man in the High Castle once too often? ;-)

 

[Steviedoo]

Found this very fitting comment on another forum:

"Mr T pulled 1,000 troops from Syria to end these "endless wars", then sent 2,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, in case there is war."

I am sure Mr T will explain it with the "alternative fact" that Saudi Arabia helped the US in WWII and stormed the beaches of Normandy side by side with US soldiers.

I just don’t get how the trump supporters can still find a way to justify his actions and his lies

 

[Harry_BKK]

US soldiers now becoming mercenaries. Mr T renting out the US army to the country from where most 9/11 perpetrators were coming from.

Pay us and we will do the killing for you! So next time MBS wants to get rid of a journalist/dissident he will just order some Green Berets to do the dirty work.

Now he's not only selling the country to the highest bidder and openly betraying allies, he's selling/renting the military to anyone willing to cough up a few Benjamins! Pretty sure Mr T thinks that it will make the US great again, the question is only in which respect. In this case, killing for cash!

The best deal maker ever! Aaah bless, @slotplayer will be proud!

EDIT: Makes me wonder to what price Mr T agreed with the Saudis that they will pay for a fallen soldier?

 

[mack341]

US soldiers now becoming mercenaries. Mr T renting out the US army to the country from where most 9/11 perpetrators were coming from.

Pay us and we will do the killing for you! So next time MBS wants to get rid of a journalist/dissident he will just order some Green Berets to do the dirty work.

Now he's not only selling the country to the highest bidder and openly betraying allies, he's selling/renting the military to anyone willing to cough up a few Benjamins! Pretty sure Mr T thinks that it will make the US great again, the question is only in which respect. In this case, killing for cash!

The best deal maker ever! View attachment 115327 Aaah bless, @slotplayer will be proud!

EDIT: Makes me wonder to what price Mr T agreed with the Saudis that they will pay for a fallen soldier?

I thought this recent deployment was 'purely defensive', providing air defence capability. If so, I don't see a problem with the saudis covering the additional cost rather than the us tax payer.

I still wander whether the germans (in general) in 2019 still want the us and british army stationed in their country (since 1945) as a deterrent to russian invasion? If so, again there are costs to uk/us taxpayers providing this 'defence'

edit: just read the bases in germany are for the whole of europe, so not necessarily about preventing a russian invasion, I think that was the original intention though to protect west germany.

interestingly the german army atm has 182,000 active personnel (with 62,000 soldiers) and costs about 47 billion euros to maintain, so not cheap, the uk's is around £37 billion with 78,000 soldiers, so I'm guessing not paid as much as their german counterparts?

 

[Kroffe]

I thought this recent deployment was 'purely defensive', providing air defence capability. If so, I don't see a problem with the saudis covering the additional cost rather than the us tax payer.

I still wander whether the germans (in general) in 2019 still want the us and british army stationed in their country (since 1945) as a deterrent to russian invasion? If so, again there are costs to uk/us taxpayers providing this 'defence'

edit: just read the bases in germany are for the whole of europe, so not necessarily about preventing a russian invasion, I think that was the original intention though to protect west germany.

interestingly the german army atm has 182,000 active personnel (with 62,000 soldiers) and costs about 47 billion euros to maintain, so not cheap, the uk's is around £37 billion

I thought you had left this wasteland of a thread and were on a break?



Welcome back to the circus!

 

[Harry_BKK]

I thought this recent deployment was 'purely defensive', providing air defence capability. If so, I don't see a problem with the saudis covering the additional cost rather than the us tax payer.

I still wander whether the germans (in general) in 2019 still want the us and british army stationed in their country (since 1945) as a deterrent to russian invasion? If so, again there are costs to uk/us taxpayers providing this 'defence'

edit: just read the bases in germany are for the whole of europe, so not necessarily about preventing a russian invasion, I think that was the original intention though to protect west germany.

interestingly the german army atm has 182,000 active personnel (with 62,000 soldiers) and costs about 47 billion euros to maintain, so not cheap, the uk's is around £37 billion

Sure, "purely defensive" AKA fighter squadrons.



And about the UK soldiers, please read the history yourselves because I am getting tired of repeating myself.

But just as a short note, the main purpose of all US and UK soldiers stationed in Germany was not to defend Germany! Plus, Germany carried most of the cost.

At present, you have less than 3,000 troops in Germany which will be reduced to virtually zero by 2020.

 

[mack341]

I thought you had left this wasteland of a thread and were on a break?

View attachment 115328

Welcome back to the circus!

break time's over! I like harry to have somebody to debate, seems like the previous trump thread did a lot of people 'in' and they evacuated ....but I will have to be a part time debater from now on myself

 

[mack341]

Sure, "purely defensive" AKA fighter squadrons.

View attachment 115329

And about the UK soldiers, please read the history yourselves because I am getting tired of repeating myself.

But just as a short note, the main purpose of all US and UK soldiers stationed in Germany was not to defend Germany! Plus, Germany carried most of the cost.

At present, you have less than 3,000 troops in Germany which will be reduced to virtually zero by 2020.

I believe fighter planes (interceptors?) can be defensive, the list above does sound broadly defensive to me.

edit: you didn't answer the question re germany, whether germans wanted us and uk troops to remain stationed there? Apparently the local businesses near the bases like the extra custom etc..it helps the economy.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I believe fighter planes (interceptors?) can be defensive, the list above does sound broadly defensive to me.

edit: you didn't answer the question re germany, whether germans wanted us and uk troops to remain stationed there? Apparently the local businesses near the bases like the extra custom etc..it helps the economy.

The general population, me included, would prefer for all foreign soldiers to leave Germany.

IIRC, I pointed it out once already. The contributions of all US installations/bases in Germany is appr. 0.01% of the GDP. The UK part is probably 0.0001% by now. So no, economically it does not make sense either.

Plus, Germany is spending billions in cleaning up the mess your and the US troops leave behind, e.g. contaminated soil, munition remnants, old houses which still have asbestos etc. Shall we send you the invoice for that?

The absolute majority of places where troops have left flourished in the following years. So that point is moot too.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I believe fighter planes (interceptors?) can be defensive, the list above does sound broadly defensive to me.

edit: you didn't answer the question re germany, whether germans wanted us and uk troops to remain stationed there? Apparently the local businesses near the bases like the extra custom etc..it helps the economy.

Here a comparison of before and after the US soldiers left. Most of the housing had to be taken down completely because the US used a lot of asbestos-ridden stuff when they had them built and never bothered removing it. Where possible, houses were renovated/cleaned of asbestos for a lot of money.

I know it because my brother bought a flat in the area.

 

[mack341]

Harry not seeking to argue for the point of it, but you said "Plus, Germany carried most of the cost. " so how is that different to this development with saudi arabia? how come the mercenaries charge doesn't stand before?

After the iraq war many us corporations supposedly made a fortune from the rebuilding projects, so it could be said there's always been a 'kickback' if you look closely enough.

BTW I'm not in favour of the US helping the saudis out, a country that beheads people in the street under blasphemy laws

from wikipedia:

"To secure convictions, Saudi Arabia's administrative and judicial authorities routinely seek confessions. To secure confessions, the authorities commonly engage in severe violations of human rights. Persons accused of blasphemy may be subjected to torture or to cruel and degrading treatment as well as to prolonged and solitary detention.

also

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

"On Monday, a horrific mass execution was carried out by the savage regime involving 37 men being killed including one being crucified and another having his head impaled on a spike. Those killed during the beheading bloodbath had all been convicted of "terrorism offences" in the hardline kingdom. However, one of those beheaded. Abdulkareem al-Hawaj, was arrested while attending an anti-government protest when he was aged just 16. He was convicted of being a "terrorist" in a trial branded a "farce" by Amnesty International."

While they insist trials are conducted to the strictest standards of fairness, evidence has emerged from the country to suggest the opposite. Trials are reported to have lasted a day and confessions extracted under torture. The country has no written penal code and no code of criminal procedure and judicial procedure. That allows courts wide powers to determine what constitutes a criminal offence and what sentences crimes deserve. The only means of appeal is directly to the King, who decides whether the condemned lives or dies. The list of punishments makes for grim reading.

Beheading remains the most common form of execution and the sentence traditionally carried out in a public square on a Friday after prayers.
Deera Square in the centre of the capital Riyadh is known locally as "Chop Chop Square”.

This question should be put to trump and every president before, congressmen and senators etc...how can you ally to such a barbaric country?

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry not seeking to argue for the point of it, but you said "Plus, Germany carried most of the cost. " so how is that different to this development with saudi arabia? how come the mercenaries charge doesn't stand before?

After the iraq war many us corporations supposedly made a fortune from the rebuilding projects, so it could be said there's always been a 'kickback' if you look closely enough.

BTW I'm not in favour of the US helping the saudis out, a country that beheads people in the street under blasphemy laws

from wikipedia:

"To secure convictions, Saudi Arabia's administrative and judicial authorities routinely seek confessions. To secure confessions, the authorities commonly engage in severe violations of human rights. Persons accused of blasphemy may be subjected to torture or to cruel and degrading treatment as well as to prolonged and solitary detention.

also

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

"On Monday, a horrific mass execution was carried out by the savage regime involving 37 men being killed including one being crucified and another having his head impaled on a spike. Those killed during the beheading bloodbath had all been convicted of "terrorism offences" in the hardline kingdom. However, one of those beheaded. Abdulkareem al-Hawaj, was arrested while attending an anti-government protest when he was aged just 16. He was convicted of being a "terrorist" in a trial branded a "farce" by Amnesty International."

While they insist trials are conducted to the strictest standards of fairness, evidence has emerged from the country to suggest the opposite. Trials are reported to have lasted a day and confessions extracted under torture. The country has no written penal code and no code of criminal procedure and judicial procedure. That allows courts wide powers to determine what constitutes a criminal offence and what sentences crimes deserve. The only means of appeal is directly to the King, who decides whether the condemned lives or dies. The list of punishments makes for grim reading.

Beheading remains the most common form of execution and the sentence traditionally carried out in a public square on a Friday after prayers.
Deera Square in the centre of the capital Riyadh is known locally as "Chop Chop Square”.

This question should be put to trump and every president before, congressmen and senators etc...how can you ally to such a barbaric country?

Again mate, the troops were not there to protect Germany but to function as a first defence line against Russia, emphasis on first, to protect France and the UK.

Germany did not pay out of their own will, they were not given the choice. Plus, they never asked for troops to be stationed in Germany. I'm too lazy now to look for the documents/treaties again.

As for Saudi Arabia, I've been a couple of times to Jeddah and Riyadh as I was sent by my employer, and vowed to never return. Made sure that they sent me to Iran twice within two months after that, each time I entered on purpose with a different passport, so I would have Iranian stamps in both and could then not enter Saudi-Arabia or the UAE again. Didn't tell my employer that I had at the time three passports though, they knew all along that I had two and I left them in that belief.

 

[mack341]

just to add I haven't watched that trump clip above, but if his logic is, the deal makes more sense or is better for the us citizen just because he extracted a few dollars out of the saudis, then I strongly disagree with him.

If it's being done to protect very important oil supply for the world, then I could see it making sense, and the saudis should stump up for the cost. That's all really, the only reasoning that is justified.

All this 'I got a tremendous deal' is a bit pathetic, like it's gonna make much difference to anything, trying to receive plaudits for basic stuff and acting as if that is all the justification required for a questionable partnership with KSA, is demeaning and desperate.

Edit: it's hard to argue against trump re the costs, it would look silly for a senator or congressman to stand up and say 'we should give this help to KSA for free' when it's a very rich country and the US has 20 trillion debt. It is complicated, US foreign policy and the bases and deployment all around the globe, and with such high national debt, at some point I would've thought there will have to be a change.

 

[Harry_BKK]

just to add I haven't watched that trump clip above, but if his logic is, the deal makes more sense or is better for the us citizen just because he extracted a few dollars out of the saudis, then I strongly disagree with him.

If it's being done to protect very important oil supply for the world, then I could see it making sense, and the saudis should stump up for the cost. That's all really, the only reasoning that is justified.

All this 'I got a tremendous deal' is a bit pathetic, like it's gonna make much difference to anything, trying to receive plaudits for basic stuff and acting as if that is all the justification required for a questionable partnership with KSA, is demeaning and desperate.

Edit: it's hard to argue against trump re the costs, it would look silly for a senator or congressman to stand up and say 'we should give this help to KSA for free' when it's a very rich country and the US has 20 trillion debt. It is complicated, US foreign policy and the bases and deployment all around the globe, and with such high national debt, at some point I would've thought there will have to be a change.

Mack, do a search. The US has about 40 bases all around Iran, including some 12,000 men in Qatar and aircraft carriers in the region.

SA bought billions worth of weaponry (IIRC, they were the biggest importer of weaponry worldwide in 2018) from the US and surely can defend themselves against anyone in the region.

Militarily, there was no need whatsoever for the extra deployment but he agreed to it just to first, show his base what kind of great deal maker he is (he is not) and second, intimidate his nemesis Iran a little more (they are not).

IIRC, Saudi Arabia is responsible for appr. 10% of the world oil supply, so not really that important. Iran could fill that void in a jiffy!

 

[Harry_BKK]

just to add I haven't watched that trump clip above, but if his logic is, the deal makes more sense or is better for the us citizen just because he extracted a few dollars out of the saudis, then I strongly disagree with him.

If it's being done to protect very important oil supply for the world, then I could see it making sense, and the saudis should stump up for the cost. That's all really, the only reasoning that is justified.

All this 'I got a tremendous deal' is a bit pathetic, like it's gonna make much difference to anything, trying to receive plaudits for basic stuff and acting as if that is all the justification required for a questionable partnership with KSA, is demeaning and desperate.

Edit: it's hard to argue against trump re the costs, it would look silly for a senator or congressman to stand up and say 'we should give this help to KSA for free' when it's a very rich country and the US has 20 trillion debt. It is complicated, US foreign policy and the bases and deployment all around the globe, and with such high national debt, at some point I would've thought there will have to be a change.

BTW, we are forgetting one part of the equation in all of this.

Saud-Arabia rescued Mr T a couple of times from bankruptcy in the 1990s or thereabouts. Sounds to me like he still owes them!