Trump Trainwreck - Ongoing diary of betrayal and evil

[Eric the Green]

(12-12-2016, 03:51 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(12-12-2016, 07:51 AM)Odin Wrote: A puppet of the Russian state cannot be allowed to become president. The electoral college must do it's duty as Hamilton described in No. 68 of the Federalist Papers and chose someone else. I don't care if it's another Republican. Romney, Jeb, or McMullen would be fine, just not Trump.

If the Trumpistas want to revolt over it, kill them.

We may need to have a coup.

First one ever in the US.

The CIA, NSA plus loyal military could pull it off.

Yeah, I'd say, at this point; whatever works. By any means necessary.

[Arkarch]

So what happens here?

Does the Russian Hacking issue force a delay in the Electoral College action?

Does the Electoral College, when they do perform duties, end with no one getting the majority?

Does the delayed result squeeze the House; will we be waiting on Noon, January 20, for the puff of white smoke as our new unknown president emerges from the doors of Congress?

What if the House does not agree in time? What if the Senate holds on VP? Do we have a President Paul Ryan? Or if the Senate votes Pence?

20th Amendment, 3 -
(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.

This should be fun.

[Eric the Green]

Fools here did question or deny that the Russians hacked and disrupted our election, didn't they?





Trump is the BIG LIAR and anyone who supports him is a fool.

[pbrower2a]

(12-13-2016, 02:10 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Fools here did question or deny that the Russians hacked and disrupted our election, didn't they?





Trump is the BIG LIAR and anyone who supports him is a fool.

I had no question that he was a liar.

The story gets more complex and less credible.

[radind]

I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

[Odin]

(12-12-2016, 08:08 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(12-12-2016, 05:44 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(12-12-2016, 04:08 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(12-12-2016, 07:51 AM)Odin Wrote: A puppet of the Russian state cannot be allowed to become president. The electoral college must do it's duty as Hamilton described in No. 68 of the Federalist Papers and chose someone else. I don't care if it's another Republican. Romney, Jeb, or McMullen would be fine, just not Trump.

If the Trumpistas want to revolt over it, kill them.

I hope you did not really mean killing people who oppose you in thought.

We are in uncharted territory. This could well be this century's equivalent to Vichy or Quisling. If it's proved that Trump & company are unregistered foreign agents, it means they violated several federal election laws, these are serious felonies. If it is further proved they aided and abetted cyberwar, it is treason. Should supporting groups revolt, the National Guard would be within rights to shoot them.

Disgusting. Well I do not condone murder as the "right" option.

Murder is UNLAWFUL killing.

[Odin]

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You will be BEGGING for Clinton by next summer.

[pbrower2a]

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You could be cheering when the military and the intelligence services make their decision on who is to be President -- and on the Senate majority  -- when things go really, really bad. You are going to realize by summer that Donald Trump is a travesty of a Christian. (I caught that when he bragged about grabbing women by the crotches without their consent and walking into women's changing rooms with women or underage girls present).

Scary as that prospect is, so might I. I can only hope that the military will insist upon new elections to undo the damage of 2016 and recognize the validity of Constitutional rights and insist upon a free and fair election.

An ignoramus or a habitual liar -- and Donald Trump is both -- is always bad news for any organization, private or public, except for a crime syndicate which usually ends up with stupid crooks.  (although the Russian Mob is unusually dangerous because it is unusually intelligent in contrast with , for example, Latin-American drug cartels). Donald Trump even claims that hacking is undetectable unless the hacker is caught in the act... which is as absurd as saying that an embezzler can be caught only when physically stealing cash.  (There is always a paper trail of efforts to conceal an ongoing embezzlement or a cyber-trail of larcenous transactions; with hacking there is a cyber-trail of IP addresses of intruders.

[radind]

(12-13-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You will be BEGGING for Clinton by next summer.

We can compare notes then. I have been in mourning for the last 8 years and finally have  a glimmer of hope. I saw no hope with Clinton.

[playwrite]

(12-11-2016, 02:41 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(12-10-2016, 11:54 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(12-10-2016, 07:51 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(12-09-2016, 02:21 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: Playwrite: Most Xers and Millies opposed the Iraq war (and Afghanistan after Bin Laden was killed) because boomers refused to allow the troops to fight with the gloves OFF.

I can't speak for all Boomers, just for this one, but when Bush 43's "surge" occurred as the 2008 election cycle was gearing up, there was a shift in tactics that came with it.  The early battle against the insurgency focused on killing bad guys.  As in Vietnam, the Army kept score with a body count.  It was presumed that if we killed more people than we lost, we must be winning.

With the surge, came a shift in tactics from killing Iraqis to protecting Iraqis.  They built a lot of walls and tried to protect the people within the walls.  There was no small amount of racial cleansing.  If the different tribal and religious factions lived in separate neighborhoods separated by walls with various forces covering the perimeter, the civilian deaths at least became less.  The phrase 'hearts and minds' was thrown around.  The new thought was that if you killed people, they'd get mad and try to kill you back.  If you protected people, they might start treating you as a friend.  This approach was called counterinsurgency.  It didn't pacify Iraq, but it did significantly better than the initial 'increase the bodycount' approach.

Protecting people, trying to end the fighting, might be less gratifying to the young boots on the ground than killing people.  It might be more fun, if a hostile sniper starts shooting at US troops from a village, to call in an air strike on the village.  Entertaining the troops isn't the general's job, though.  If you want to entertain the troops, you call in the USO.  If you want to end an insurgency, you use counterinsurgency tactics.

But even with the new tactics, if you are fighting an insurgency, you really want a certain ratio of occupying troops to boots on the ground.  LBJ was told that the troop level he was intending to use in Vietnam would not be sufficient if the opposition went to insurgent warfare.  LBJ went in anyway, the enemy went insurgent, and the US didn't have the will to escalate.  The exact same thing happened in Iraq.  If you don't have the will and the funds for a lot of boots on the ground, the tactics don't matter a lot, you are going to get a quagmire.  After years of trying to make it work with inadequate force, and knowing full well that they were fielding an inadequate force, even Bush 43 recognized that it was time to start bringing the troops home.

Anyway, this Boomer at least favors counterinsurgency tactics when fighting insurgencies because expending ammunition with the goal of maximizing the bodycount just helps the insurgents recruit.

I was going to post most of the same thing - all except that protecting ordinary Iraqis was actually a goal from the beginning; it was just that the surge was needed to have enough troops to do it.  Iraq would ultimately have been a success had the US followed through on ensuring democratic traditions were established, rather than corrupted.

However, I disagree that "will" would have been sufficient to do the same in Vietnam.  Human nature is such that it's difficult to make people enthusiastic about fighting and sacrificing for the benefit of people who are on the other side of the world.  It's far easier to make them enthusiastic about fighting and sacrificing to fight against the evil of people on the other side of the world.  In that respect, Cynic Hero's view is much closer to what most people could feel emotionally, even if logically it's a mistake.

There was a significant change of tactics that came with the surge.  Whether the numbers was more important or the tactics seems to be tied in with values.  Conservatives seem to think it was a matter of will and brute force.  Progressives tend to think how one interacts with the people whose front yards are being turned into battlegrounds is important.  I wouldn't neglect either factor.  I doubt there will be agreement on such.

But we weren't going to do well in either Vietnam or Iraq with just numbers.  Whether it is money or political capitol, we just weren't willing or able to put enough boots on the ground to get critical mass given the local population levels.  From day one, the Democrats were telling the Bush 43 administration that they weren't putting in enough troops.  The Democrats were listening to the Pentagon's briefings.  Thus, the Democrats correctly predicted quagmire.  It took Bush 43 far too many years and lives before he finally accepted that fighting insurgency isn't easy and started pulling out, pulling the rug out of McCain's "stay the course" presidential run.  

Bush also had the "Read my lips, no new taxes" problem.  He wanted to fight wars but not pay for them.  This limited numbers available and will continue to limit numbers as long as Reagan unravelling era economics continues to dominate Congress.

At the same time, the surge did change the situation.  Before the surge, the "stay the course" vs "cut and run" debate was divisive and values locked, both sides convinced and not listening.  The surge started to work.  I went from a full 'quagmire' position -- saying that you can't get there from here -- to saying you can do nation building at gunpoint, but it is very expensive in gold, iron and blood.  It just isn't worth it.  

I do believe the Iraq war changed US values at a national scale.  The "stay the course" v. "cut and run" debate was to a great degree a reprise of the Vietnam War debates.  I see this debate as essentially settled.  It is now understood that fighting insurgency is a tough tough thing, that occupying territory requires lots of effort and lives, that it should be avoided if one doesn't have a clear path to victory and an exit strategy.

I'm concerned that Trump might not get it.  I worry that his call for more aggressive use of force wasn't just another of his empty campaign promises, that he will try to sell a 'short victorious war' that will be anything but.

I don't get the feeling that "Cynic Hero's view is much closer to what most people could feel emotionally, even if logically it's a mistake."  Then again, I live in a predominantly blue region.  It's a values thing.  (Yes, I know you are from Massachusetts as well.)  Most people I talk to would fight a war to win rather than to gratify emotions, and if they aren't fighting to win they would rather not fight at all.  While there is much to be prideful regarding Scotts-Irish heritage and values, their tendency to embrace violence isn't shared in the Whig Yankee tradition.  The country is very much split.

Funny, I had just read this article when I came upon your post -

THE MOST EFFECTIVE WEAPON ON THE MODERN BATTLEFIELD IS CONCRETE

I would also add bulldozers and berms if you're keeping track of current tactics around Mosul, al-Bab and al-Raqqa.

[playwrite]

(12-11-2016, 02:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: ...Speak for yourself, please.  As an actual conservative, it looks from my side like it's the progressives who think it's a matter of will and brute force, and indeed, you're the one who wants to talk in those terms.  Conservatives understand a lot more of the nuances of different missions, the force levels needed to achieve them, and how they fit together into a geopolitical strategy.  Policing and pacification for the benefit of the locals is a very different mission from simply invading to remove an evil dictator and then leaving the locals to fend for themselves....

 You got a lot correct, e.g., strategy and tactics are situational with the objective being penultimate.

However, suggesting "Conservatives understand a lot more of the nuances..."  is clear indication that you were in a coma from 2000-2008.  I'm sure that's still taking time to recover from.  Hang in there.

[playwrite]

(12-12-2016, 01:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: ...I dread Trump taking over the war on IS.... 

Trump coming  onboard is the cause of the biggest tactical (but not the biggest strategic) mistake made so far by the Iraqis in their current effort to retake Mosul - the IA 9th's impatient capture of al-Salam hospital (just a click from the 4th Bridge over the Tigres into Mosul's Right Bank) and subsequent ambush entrampment; the IA's losses are much more than the offically reported and a big setback.   They had been settling in with the war of attrition on the Left Bank particularly after the Coalition took out the final bridge that sets an upper limit to VBIEDs on the Left Bank. But, Trump's election got them anxious and wanting to get the offensive completely over or at least have E. Mosul in hand and the Right Bank surrounded and isolated.  The latter objective is still feasible but we'll have to wait and see.

On a better note, the Iraqis seemed to have gotton some control over the Al-Hashd (Iranian-connected Shia milita) in the Ninevih province west of Mosul to open back up the "escape hatch" for IS douchbags to flee Mosul and escape to Syria. Letting Iran convince them to choke off that escape hatch was the biggest Iraqi strategic mistake so far.  If you're reading that part of the underreported news, you'll see that reopening the escape hatch has resulted in the Syrian pro-govt and Russians paying a big price (Palmyra and Deir ez-Zor) for their Alleppo war crimes.  We'll see if it has the downside of also eventually impacting Turkey and the SLA in the al-Bab offensive or the Kurds' al Raqqa effort - ME is always a risk and a fools poker game. 

The Iraqis still have a good chance of expelling IS, as a calliphate, from their lands in 3-6 months.  Let's see if Trump takes credit for it.  More importantly, let's see how he sucks up to Putin and al-Assad as they continue to commit war crimes. And once the SLA comes in direct contact with the Syrian Army, Trump's gonna have to decide between his lover Putin and Erdogan at some point, and both play pretty rough -

Turkey threatening Trump’s business to sway policy – report

Hardly reported at all was just a couple weeks ago WW3 almost got started when supposedly Syrian jets bombed and killed a lot of Turkey troops. Turkey rushed in their most sophisticated SAMs and have now constant fighter jet patrols over their troops - something a tad more necessary for Syrian jets meaning it may have been, or could become, Russian jets attacking a NATO ally. Obama and Putin did talk and both calmed the situation down before it was even generally noticed by anybody. Next time, imagine Trump tweeting about it at 3am?

[playwrite]

A parallel scenario -

I can see the Trump presidency playing out along similar (i.e. history rhyrmes rather that repeats) lines as GW Bush's presidency, but on steroids.

First, not only his refusal for daily security briefings but apparently at war with the CIA over the Russian hacks is very reminisent of what happen when W got the WH and they shutdown and discredited any person or issue from the previous Bill Clinton adminstrations.  That included the warnings from Richard Clarke (then National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counter-terrorism) about al Qaeda's declaration of war on the US and plan to strike the homeland -

Against All Enemies

As IS loses it's caliphate in Iraq, it is going to lash out.  While Syria's Assad, Russia's Putin and Iran's mulllahs are targets, IS probable sees Trump as the poster boy for hatred of all things Muslim.  An attack on Trump/USA would probable have much more traction for a broader array of the Islamic world.  Their development of Vehical-Born IEDs (VBIEDs) has become extremely sophisticated.  Two or three of these going off in DC and/or NYC would do extreme damage at a scale approaching 9/11.

Second, would be the reaction to such a attack.  As the Chinese recently opinionated, "Trump is as ignorant as a child."  He probably doesn't have any sense of the difference between a IS, SLA, Hezbollah, or al-Hashd fighter, and probable doesn't give a shXt - 'they're all towel heads, right?'   And his current lover, Putin, and his soon to be best buddies Assad and Erdogan are going to stroke him on it being all those Iranian big towel heads fault just as much as Cheney and the neoCons convinced W that it was all Saddam and the Iraqis fault.  And just like W had the bias against Saddam even before (and unrelated to) 9/11, Trump is already stronlgy and politically bias against Iran and the Nuke deal.  And we all know Bibi is going to be humping this.  The thing is, Iran, military-wise and how connected it is, is not  puny Iraq  - but that's not going to give Trump pause, that's going to stimulate him.

Then third, if we survive the first two, comes the financial bubble and the meltdown.  More on that latter; for now, think 2008 on steroids.

Some people remember; others become Trump Chumps.

[pbrower2a]

(12-13-2016, 10:31 AM)radind Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You will be BEGGING for Clinton by next summer.

We can compare notes then. I have been in mourning for the last 8 years and finally have  a glimmer of hope. I saw no hope with Clinton.

Mourning? More people will be mourning for loved ones killed in workplace accidents because health and safety laws are gutted. Should there be a war, Donald Trump will make it all the deadlier to Americans through his bungling. If he succeeds in repealing Obamacare without replacing it, then people will die because they will be priced into a grave. 

I expect the Trump economy to have elite profits and compensation as the sole objectives of the American economy. No human suffering will be in excess so long as it turns or indulges a profit. This will be a cheap labor country with brutal management... and the only solution that the elites will offer to the common man is to work harder, ignore hardships, and make sure to appreciate how wonderful their 'benefactors' are. Make America Great Again -- sure, but only for the super-rich.

Many people are going to recognize American citizenship the way Soviet citizens typically saw it -- something one was born with and simply has not yet renounced. It has been a desirable thing to attain and keep -- but not under a dictatorship that mistreats one on behalf of people who have no responsibility for the welfare of any but themselves.

I look at a Trump Presidency and see nothing but despair. Any meaning in life will be from the ordinary joys of consumerism and personal milestones that would happen anyway... and from resisting a vile regime. I have never participated in a protest before -- but I expect to do so often.

[Eric the Green]

So now, we have folks like Classic Xer and Warren Dew and Galen in charge of our government and society.

It is an outrage, and it's been hard for me to contain my anger, and so I'm sorry for any name-calling of you guys. You guys will have your way for a while, and you'll have another chance to learn the lesson that it's wrong. I don't think you'll learn it.

You Trumpsters are in charge now. For you, it's OK to let big business do whatever it wants for profit: open up public lands to more mining, drilling, logging; destroy wildlife, destroy the land's ecology, despoil natural wonders and treasures. That's all fine with you. That's what you want; coal burning to unleash more acid rain down upon your heads. Pollute our water with coal tailings and oil spills, destroying sacred lands and the property of the people who were in this land long before you. Pollute our water and our air with more smog. Unleash as much CO2 as you can, believing the propaganda of Trump's climate science deniers that fossil fuel burning doesn't cause more storms, droughts, floods, fires and storm surges in rising waters, more killing off of species we don't have the right to kill, on both land and sea, more wildlife death and habitat loss for them. That's all wonderful to you. That's what you guys want with all your heart.

That's great to you, because it means maybe you don't have to pay as much in taxes to "freeloaders." "Dependent people who don't work." Mostly people of color, who live off of welfare, which you think your taxes go to, although they don't. And although welfare pays virtually nothing, and not for very long. But that's OK; it offends you to have to pay taxes to support lazy black people and Mexicans, and you want to have your scapegoat immigrants to blame your economic troubles on and the invasion of your language. And it's all great if we take away their civil rights, and their right to vote too. Appoint more Scalias to take away their rights, and all of our rights too. That's OK to you. All rights, that is, except your right to blow someone away in a second. Your right to take away others' lives, and allow anyone anytime to take away lives and kill innocent people if they want to do so. That right you defend, but the right to vote, the right of free speech, the right to have another religion from you; those rights you don't care a fucking tinker's damn about, just as long as you can have your "self-defense," which consists of allowing crazy people to mow down dozens of people in theaters, parking lots and schools.

So you guys are in charge now. You'll reduce taxes, especially on billionaires. That's what you knowingly voted for, because you don't really know what made America "great," you don't have a clue; it was investment in education, research, infrastructure that made America great; but YOU guys, Classic Xer, Warren Dew, Galen and your buddies like Trump, Pence and Sessions and Rex Tillerman and all Trump's other stupid tycoons and gangsters and thieves, honestly believe that if we give people tax breaks, that these benefits will magically happen. You think the way to make America great again, is to give "freedom" to these billionaire tycoons. You think that's what will make America great again, is to repeat exactly what made America lousy: Reaganomics. You think the 1980s trickle-down economics and free market bullshit "worked", when it not only didn't, but is exactly the problem. So, you guys, let's see how it works again. Go ahead, watch the benefits trickle down. We've been waiting for this trickle for 35 years.

The promised trickle has never arrived. But you're still waiting. You'll be waiting while our country slides into oblivion; while our forests and our fields go up in smoke, while our air and water is despoiled, our natural wonders desecrated, our wildlife and ecology ruined, our climate destroyed for generations and millenia to come; and there will be lots of "adaptation" for us to make, says Rex, all to make sure he doesn't lose any of his billions. It's much more important to you that Rex Tillerson doesn't lose any of his billions of dollars, than to save any of our precious life; more important than any of the people in this country, or the prosperity and opportunity for its citizens. NO, the important thing to YOU guys, Galen, Warren, Classic, is for Rex Tillerson and his worldwide cabal to keep their billions and keep living in their castles in New York and California while your poor deceived and angry folks in flyover country wither away, never understanding for a minute that your stupid slogans of "freedom" are costing them everything except their prejudice and hatred, which YOU guys stoke in order to protect your precious trickle-down, free market, laissez faire ideology of "freedom" and your right to kill others.

Shame on you. Shame on anyone who falls for the lies, all the lies about Hillary and the Democrats, all the lies about freedom, all the crap that you peddle. You guys have your way for a while. The man you have entrusted to carry out your plans of destruction will probably self-destruct, though, and may take America down with him. So good luck with all that. Have fun. And keep waiting for that trickle. Just keep waiting and hoping for that tinkle-down. It will never come, and never has. But keep waiting. It's been 35 years now. Just keep waiting, and I'll wait for yet another chance to get rid of your power, and get rid of your ideology, so we CAN maybe make America great again, after this 35-year and counting detour into hell and stupidity.

[playwrite]

Here's some thoughts for the EC electorates -

Top 10 signs that a U.S. president is a Russian agent

Quote:It sounds like the stuff of conspiracy theorists and the tinfoil brigade.
It’s even straight out of Cold War fiction.

But in the shadowy world of espionage, accusations and counter-accusations, how can the ordinary citizen tell if the next U.S. president is actually an agent of the Kremlin?

Good news: We’ve got your back.

Here are 10 “telltale signs” that a U.S. president might be a Russian spy, and how we might be able to swear in a “Comrade-in-Chief” next month.

1. U.S. intelligence concludes that the Kremlin helped put him in power.
That’s usually a pretty strong giveaway right there. The CIA has never before accused the Kremlin of interfering in a U.S. election. They’re probably not 0-for-1.
Mind you, when Russian hackers pointedly attacked and embarrassed Donald Trump’s opponent, but left him completely alone, you have to ask: Did we really need a report by the CIA?

2. The new president sides with the Kremlin against the CIA.
Trump’s dismissive response to this news includes three classic spin techniques: shooting the messenger, by attacking the CIA; misdirection, by raising doubts about the CIA’s competence, namely the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when it didn’t; and begging the question, by implying we should now “move on.”
Neither is a serious argument. Indeed, if the CIA’s report is accurate, why on Earth would we “move on”?
Imagine Ronald Reagan or Dwight Eisenhower reacting this way to a CIA statement about Kremlin activities in the U.S.
Go on — try.

3. He receives vast sums of money from mysterious Russians.
This even includes an astonishing $95 million that Trump personally received from a Russian billionaire during the 2008 collapse.
In Vladimir Putin’s kleptostate, there is no fine line between the state and the private sector, the president and the oligarchs.
As Trump’s son Eric confessed: “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. … We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”

4. His election suddenly makes a lot of people rich … in Moscow.
You think Wall Street has done well since Trump’s election victory?
The S&P 500 stock index SPX, +0.68% of the U.S. is up about 5% since Nov. 8.
Moscow’s RTS index: 20%.
Yes, really — from 973 to 1,148. Let the vodka flow! It’s not just about the oil rally, either. The RTS’s increase is more than twice that of global energy stocks.
Putin and his pals were nursing painful losses for several years. But no longer — Moscow stocks are back to their highest levels since the Ukrainian crisis.

5. He wants to end Russia’s global isolation.
Vladimir Putin’s sinister state has been subject to global sanctions since 2014, and for good reason. He’s destabilized Ukraine and annexed Crimea. The British government concluded he had “probably” assassinated a critic in London. He helped arm the people who blew up Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, killing 298 people.
Trump’s response? He praises Putin’s leadership, wants to “get along” with Russia, and hints strongly at ending those sanctions — something he can do by executive order.

6. He surrounds himself with known Russian agents and sympathizers.

Those include Carter Page and the menacing Paul Manafort. You’d imagine that a Kremlin agent in the White House would appoint a close friend of Russia — indeed, someone who actually won the Russian Order of Friendship award — as secretary of state.
No wonder one of Putin’s advisers is praising Trump’s “fantastic” team.


7. He repeatedly refuses to criticize the Kremlin.
It’s been Sherlock Holmes’s dog that didn’t bark.
Time and again, during the election campaign and since, Trump has had every opportunity and incentive to criticize Vladimir Putin. He was repeatedly criticized on the campaign trail for being too soft on Putin, or too friendly toward him, or even in Putin’s pocket.
And each time, Trump failed. He just couldn’t criticize Putin. Not even for allegedly murdering journalists. I mean, how hard is that?
Sometimes silence speaks louder than words.

8. He immediately drives a wedge between the U.S. and Russia’s chief Asian rival, China.
What could make the Kremlin happier than a public feud between Washington and Beijing — for example, over Taiwan?
A full trade war between the two, including tariffs — that’s what!
In retrospect, doesn’t it seem odd that so much of Trump’s campaign has been devoted to attacking China and demonizing the Chinese (oh, and the Japanese) before the eyes of the American public?
Any conflict or tension between the U.S. and China, the world’s two biggest economic powers, is great news for Russia. It weakens China, hurts international unity against Russia and reduces America’s strategic options. Brilliant!

9. He also undermines NATO.
Trump’s comments undermining NATO, and particularly its commitment to the Baltic states, has long been the stuff of fantasy to Putin’s Kremlin.
The Russians have hated the North Atlantic Treaty Organization since Harry Truman set it up in 1949 to stop the Soviet Union’s expansion of its European sphere of influence. They’re especially furious about the Western alliance’s expansion into Eastern Europe after the collapse of the Berlin Wall.
Many in Russia consider the Baltic states to be traditional subjects of the “Russian empire.”
It tells you a lot that the Lithuanian government recently started handing out instructions to its citizens on how to cope if Russian tanks roll back in.

10. Oh, yeah — and he once marketed his own brand of vodka.
Not beer. Not bourbon. Not even gin.
Vodka.

Really, in retrospect, how hard was this?

Ask a Trump Chump how hard it is to see.  Prepare for vacant look or nervous twitch with "does not compute" and "make America great again" repetitions.  Maybe a  little drool.

[radind]

(12-13-2016, 01:53 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 10:31 AM)radind Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You will be BEGGING for Clinton by next summer.

We can compare notes then. I have been in mourning for the last 8 years and finally have  a glimmer of hope. I saw no hope with Clinton.

Mourning? More people will be mourning for loved ones killed in workplace accidents because health and safety laws are gutted. Should there be a war, Donald Trump will make it all the deadlier to Americans through his bungling. If he succeeds in repealing Obamacare without replacing it, then people will die because they will be priced into a grave. 

I expect the Trump economy to have elite profits and compensation as the sole objectives of the American economy. No human suffering will be in excess so long as it turns or indulges a profit. This will be a cheap labor country with brutal management... and the only solution that the elites will offer to the common man is to work harder, ignore hardships, and make sure to appreciate how wonderful their 'benefactors' are. Make America Great Again -- sure, but only for the super-rich.

Many people are going to recognize American citizenship the way Soviet citizens typically saw it -- something one was born with and simply has not yet renounced. It has been a desirable thing to attain and keep -- but not under a dictatorship that mistreats one on behalf of people who have no responsibility for the welfare of any but themselves.

I look at a Trump Presidency and see nothing but despair. Any meaning in life will be from the ordinary joys of consumerism and personal milestones that would happen anyway... and from resisting a vile regime. I have never participated in a protest before -- but I expect to do so often.

Will compare notes with you this Summer.

[Eric the Green]

(12-13-2016, 10:31 AM)radind Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You will be BEGGING for Clinton by next summer.

We can compare notes then. I have been in mourning for the last 8 years and finally have  a glimmer of hope. I saw no hope with Clinton.

Mourning for WHAT? That Obama deported millions of illegal aliens? That he kept the nation safe from terrorists? That he asked for more gun laws, and didn't get them? That he appointed a couple of justices who weren't able to protect abortion or voting rights? That he gave health insurance to some people? That he passed some financial reform to keep the financial gamblers from ruining our economy again? That he kept the terrorists at bay without getting us into any ground wars for 8 years? What in GOD'S name do YOU have to "mourn" over?

Now it's time for folks like us to mourn. And we'll have plenty to mourn over. More species killed off for eternity. Coral reefs dying. Forests burned. Our air and water spoiled. Millions dying in storms, floods and fires. More innocent people killed off by crazy people with guns. More innocent lives abroad wiped out. Less and less opportunity for young people. More workers fired and exploited and abused and underpaid. An economy ruined again by trickle-down social darwinism. We'll have plenty to mourn over if Trump gets us involved in some stupid war because he was personally offended. If our rights to vote and speak get taken away. 

YOU won't mourn, because now you have an ideologue of "freedom" to destroy and kill and despoil in the White House, someone who mouths nonsense about the "right to life" and the "freedom" to discriminate against gays. THAT will make you happy. You are so silly, so foolish.

[Eric the Green]

We won't have to worry about right-wingers getting shot for a while. They are in charge now. They can just have Trump shoot people on their behalf. It will be them who do the shooting for a while. It will be if and when the moderate-left ever gets the ball again, or maybe if some coup or impeachment happens against their hero, THEN the right-wing will get rebellious and angry again, and may well rise up in arms up to keep their guns and their tax money and the immigrants out. Then IF and when THEY rebel violently, shooting people and putting our nation at risk, then they will have to be put down, and their guns taken away, perhaps shot or probably put in jail, because of the violence OF THEIR OWN MAKING. That is indeed "self-defense" and the defense of the nation.

It's up to THEM when and IF that "left-wing socialist takeover" ever happens again, whether they behave or not. I don't have too many concerns about liberal-minded and diverse young people demonstrating in the streets. MY concern is what Trump will do to THEM, not what THEY will do to TRUMP.

[radind]

(12-13-2016, 02:47 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 10:31 AM)radind Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 07:47 AM)Odin Wrote:

(12-13-2016, 06:19 AM)radind Wrote: I am expecting the USA to be better off by Summer 2017. Still not totally convinced that the US has escaped from Clinton. Waiting on 19 Dec election.

You will be BEGGING for Clinton by next summer.

We can compare notes then. I have been in mourning for the last 8 years and finally have  a glimmer of hope. I saw no hope with Clinton.

Mourning for WHAT? That Obama deported millions of illegal aliens? That he kept the nation safe from terrorists? That he asked for more gun laws, and didn't get them? That he appointed a couple of justices who weren't able to protect abortion or voting rights? That he gave health insurance to some people? That he passed some financial reform to keep the financial gamblers from ruining our economy again? That he kept the terrorists at bay without getting us into any ground wars for 8 years? What in GOD'S name do YOU have to "mourn" over?

Now it's time for folks like us to mourn. And we'll have plenty to mourn over. More species killed off for eternity. Coral reefs dying. Forests burned. Our air and water spoiled. Millions dying in storms, floods and fires. More innocent people killed off by crazy people with guns. More innocent lives abroad wiped out. Less and less opportunity for young people. More workers fired and exploited and abused and underpaid. An economy ruined again by trickle-down social darwinism. We'll have plenty to mourn over if Trump gets us involved in some stupid war because he was personally offended. If our rights to vote and speak get taken away. 

YOU won't mourn, because now you have an ideologue of "freedom" to destroy and kill and despoil in the White House, someone who mouths nonsense about the "right to life" and the "freedom" to discriminate against gays. THAT will make you happy. You are so silly, so foolish.

I have given up on any meaningful dialogue for the present. Will check in with you later this Summer.