What's Trump up to now?

[Walpknut]

Even Milo Yiannopulous is afraid.

Who gets the reference?

 

[Prone Squanderer]

 

[Crni Vuk]

Hmmm gasing a civilian target and bombing a military base sure seem like different things to me..... I mean one seems like a crime against humanity and the other seems to be a legitimate military target. And maybe the best way to help the refugees would be making sure they don't have to become refugees. But hey with the attitude that the US should not use there military against anyone we would live in a vastly different world. Germany would probably still control France, South Korea would not exist, the UN would not exist, I mean I could go on and yes they don't always do the right thing, but even at there worst they still seem to be doing a better job then most. What's your answer to the situation in the middle east? A sit-in?

*Le sigh*
And how often has (insert power) done any good with some military action against (insert nation here) in the last 30 years?

Just because something feels right doesn't always mean it is right. Seriously, I would have a the very least appreciated it if Trump and his military advicors waited till the outcome was clear. Wasn't Bush starting a war with Iraq for WMDs? That one really worked out well for the US and the middle east in the end, didn't it?

And now everyone trusts Trump when he says, Assad did it? Or that his actions are actually a 'good' response? I beg to differ.

This is something that I really hate, it highlights this double-morale, this hypocrisy that's always going on. The same kind of shitty stuff that lead to bombings in Yugoslavia for reasons that are even today not completely solved - massacres in Kosovo. But, Kosovo is today independed. It's a corrupt hell, with 70% unemployment, and the people are seen as human trash when try to get into Europe for a better life. But hey! At least it was possible to bomb some shit.

Bombs, bombs, bombs ... that's ALL we've seen for the last 30-40 years. Has it improvend anything in the middle east? Has it prevented ANY terrorism? Has it changed something or improved something for the better in the long run? I would say not really. If this was some kind of experiment, you would have to come to the conclussion that military actions havn't been the wrong choice for most cases.

Also WW2 and the Nazis? really? Great job of comparing apples with oranges *claps* because it was Nazi Germany which declared a war on the US after all. Just out for the fun of it, has Assad declared war on the US? As far as I remember, Syria is still a sovereign nation. And I think they are kinda allied with Russia, or at least Russia is supporting Assad. So Trump and his 'advicors' are really playing with fire here. Like literaly. We are is 2017 not 1937, for the case someone didn't get the memo.

I don't get it why everyone is jumping out of their steats due to this 'gas' attack anyway. Oh! People are dieing! They have been dieing in Syra for the last 5 years or so, but that didn't really bother anyone like I said bombing infants is OK, even the US can do it - accidantly of course! It's called colateral damage. But if assad uses gas to kill babies, it's news worthy suddenly. And it is also not the first time gas was used in such situations, curious why they havn't acted before. Give it 1 or 2 months and no one will care about it anymore and return to business as usual.

Let us be honest here, this missile attack had nothing to do with justice it was simply put, it was done due to perplexity, beacuse no one fucking knows what to do, so they thought they should do SOMETHING, regardless if it helps or not.

 

[GonZo_626]

*Le sigh*
And how often has (insert power) done any good with some military action against (insert nation here) in the last 30 years?

Just because something feels right doesn't always mean it is right. Seriously, I would have a the very least appreciated it if Trump and his military advicors waited till the outcome was clear. Wasn't Bush starting a war with Iraq for WMDs? And now everyone trusts Trump when he says, Assad did it?

This is something that I really hate, it highlights this double-morale this hypocrisy of that's always going on. The same kind of shitty stuff that lead to bombings in Yugoslavia for reasons that are even today not completely solved - massacres in Kosovo. But, Kosovo is today independed. It's a corrupt hell, with 70% unemployment, and the people are seen as human trash when try to get into Europe for a better life. But hey! At least it was possible to bomb some shit.

Bombs, bombs, bombs ... that's ALL we've seen for the last 30-40 years. Has it improvend anything in the middle east?

Also WW2 and the Nazis? really? Great job of comparing apples with oranges *claps* beacuse it was Nazi Germany which declared a war on the US after all. Just out for the fun of it, has Assad declared war on the US? As far as I remember, Syria is still a sovereign nation. And I think they are kinda allied with Russia, or at least Russia is supporting Assad. So Trump and his 'advicors' are really playing with fire here. Like literaly.

I don't get it why everyone is jumping out of their steats due to this 'gas' attack anyway. Oh! People are dieing! They have been dieing in syrah for the last 5 years or so. And it is also not the first time gas was used in such situations. Give it 1 or 2 months and no one will care about it anymore and return to business as usual.

Let us be honest here, this missile attack had nothing to do with justice it was simply put, it was done due to perplexity, beacuse no one fucking knows what to do, so they thought they should do SOMETHING, regardless if it helps or not.

Uhhm on Dec 8 1941 the US declared war on Germany the Germans did not declare war on the US until Dec 11. Russia has been allied in some way to many countries the Americans have fought with in the cold war and that never stopped the states or escalated to anything beyond some hard stares. Also Trump just carried through with Obamas red line comment in 2013 about gas attacks (which Obama wouldn't) and as far as bombs, bombs, bombs and staying out of sovereign nations "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke. And as far as the missile attack not helping it let the world know that once again America is shifting to a proactive stance instead of a reactionary stance that it has had with Obama. This reactionary stance has led many to believe in the weakening of the US's power and ability to project power. I guess they know that the US is willing to whip it out again (Reference to Lyndon Johnson).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarations_of_war_during_World_War_II (check the dates)

 

[Crni Vuk]

So the US was a dick to Nazi germany too. Big surprise. Just joking. Still WW2 was a completely different time compared to today, and you can't draw comparision here or I would have to ask you, when will you invade Syra?

Still, what good has come from all the invasions and bombings and other military actions we saw in the last 30 years from the US and Europe? And Johnson? Oh well ... Vietnam worked well for him too I guess. Just like Iraq for Bush Jr.

This 'proactive stance' you're talking about is pretty much what got us here in the first place.

When will the US finally realize that most of the world sees THEM(!) not Russia, Syria or ISIS as the worlds greatest danger.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/greatest-threat-world-peace-country_n_4531824.html

Sorry, no one NO ONE is buying this bullshit of help, humanitarian aid or what ever anymore. Not with Obama, not with Bush and not with Trump either. At this point the US is just the same kind of bully like all the others.

 

[Walpknut]

This isn't a matter of who is in the wrong or the right, in this case no one is anyway, they are all evil douchebags, It's a matter of how this very clear breach of international agreements at the hands of the dumbest moron to hold office will fuck over everyone. Childish narratives of good vs evil stopped being aplicable to international politics a long time ago, specially when it comes to the US doing whatever they want with the middle east.

 

[GonZo_626]

So the US was a dick to Nazi germany too. Big surprise. Just joking. Still WW2 was a completely different time compared to today, and you can't draw comparision here or I would have to ask you, when will you invade Syra?

Still, what good has come from all the invasions and bombings and other military actions we saw in the last 30 years from the US and Europe? And Johnson? Oh well ... Vietnam worked well for him too I guess. Just like Iraq for Bush Jr.

This 'proactive stance' you're talking about is pretty much what got us here in the first place.

When will the US finally realize that most of the world sees THEM(!) not Russia, Syria or ISIS as the worlds greatest danger.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/greatest-threat-world-peace-country_n_4531824.html

Sorry, no one NO ONE is buying this bullshit of help, humanitarian aid or what ever anymore. Not with Obama, not with Bush and not with Trump either. At this point the US is just the same kind of bully like all the others.

I think the Ukrainians would disagree with this. I mean Russia actually invaded their neighbor, and has continually supported rebel movements within the Ukraine with violence. They have also not followed any international agreements with this and are treating them the same as the US treats the middle east. The difference being the middle east is actually a very fucked up place, not a peaceful neighbor.

The world just wants to see the US as the complete bad guy, and like I have stated even at there worst they are better then most.

This isn't a matter of who is in the wrong or the right, in this case no one is anyway, they are all evil douchebags, It's a matter of how this very clear breach of international agreements at the hands of the dumbest moron to hold office will fuck over everyone. Childish narratives of good vs evil stopped being aplicable to international politics a long time ago, specially when it comes to the US doing whatever they want with the middle east.

So if Trump is the dumbest moron to hold office what is Kin Jong Un?

 

[Walpknut]

Didn't know Kim Jung Un was ever the president of the US...

The US is no better than Russia. They have their thumbs in do many pies, have orchestrated tons of wars, armed rebel groups to distabilize an inconvinient government (for those groups to then become extremist terrorist organizations), straight up stolen land have directly killed thousands of civilians in drone strikes. They are not better than most, they just are the bully with the rich dad. This is not an statement against american citizens but rather their government.

 

[GonZo_626]

Didn't know Kim Jung Un was ever the president of the US...

The US is no better than Russia. They have their thumbs in do many pies, have orchestrated tons of wars, armed rebel groups to distabilize an inconvinient government (for those groups to then become extremist terrorist organizations), straight up stolen land have directly killed thousands of civilians in drone strikes. They are not better than most, they just are the bully with the rich dad. This is not an statement against american citizens but rather their government.

Your wording seemed to me to imply leader of any nation not just the US and in the case of just the US there is evidence of many morons running the country. Trump is just the newest in the long line. And in the grand scheme of wars the couple of thousand civilians that have died at the US hands in drone strikes are nothing compared to the amount of casualties in other wars that have lasted much less time. The carpet bombing campaigns used in the world wars killed far more civilians (50 000 000 approx.), how about the Russians when they invaded Afghanistan (1 000 000 approx.)? Sorry but the US actually tries to limit civilian causalities, not just be a bully with a rich dad.

Also as another comparison to the world wars is the whole fixing the country afterwards. The allies kicked the living hell out of the axis, totally destroyed a couple of nations. But the attitude of people was different at the time and the allies occupied those countries for many, many years and in some ways still take care of them in the case of Japan. Nowadays though people want the quick victory and then leave, nobody acknowledges the fact that it took a long time to "fix" those conquered nations after WW2. The fix was in both attitudes of the people and rebuilding infrastructure. They left quickly after WW1 and a generation later we had WW2 after WW2 they stayed and turned those countries into allies slowly. Where do people think Germany would be if everybody left after a year? Would we have been fighting them again in the 60's? Where do you think the middle east would be if the US just full on invaded (not just these mini wars, and yes they are mini) and fully controlled these countries? Would Syria become the next Germany?

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Also @Crni you are right in a way, the US has had a problem for even longer then 30 years. They don't finish the job, they just blow stuff up and move on because people get tired of it and nobody has the guts or wants to spend the money to see it to the end.

They are good at stopping the bat shit crazy's running countries but never stay to fix the country.

 

[Supreme Shah Ismail]

Ah yes because we all know its the US's responsibility to intervene in other nations affairs and that's totally not a colonialists or imperialist mentality what so ever.

Trump literally was pushing for stealing Iraqi oil because it was somehow theirs. Or trump saying Iran has been taking over Iraq lol.

 

[GonZo_626]

Ah yes because we all know its the US's responsibility to intervene in other nations affairs and that's totally not a colonialists or imperialist mentality what so ever.

Trump literally was pushing for stealing Iraqi oil because it was somehow theirs. Or trump saying Iran has been taking over Iraq lol.

Somebody has too, we all now the UN cant get anything done anymore. Or should a bunch more people just be gassed, lined up and shot, persecuted, face arrests and torture just because of their religion, race, political view.

I can't wait to see what Trump will do to N. Korea.

 

[Walpknut]

Spoken like a true caricature.

The US doesn't invade countries, they "fix" them, even when they end up wlrse than before the US got there... man you guys drink your own kool aid so much is kinda scary. Complete brainwash. Did manifest destiny become popular again? You can't wait to see how Trump starts more conflict? I guess the US has never had to feel any of the wars they start in the flesh so to you it's just some kewl pew pew pews.

 

[GonZo_626]

Spoken like a true caricature.

The US doesn't invade countries, they "fix" them, even when they end up wlrse than before the US got there... man you guys drink your own kool aid so much is kinda scary. Complete brainwash. Did manifest destiny become popular again? You can't wait to see how Trump starts more conflict? I guess the US has never had to feel any of the wars they start in the flesh so to you it's just some kewl pew pew pews.

HAhahaha yeah im not american so piss off with your assumptions. I now assume that outside of the internet you are probably the guy who sees someone beating the crap out of someone who cant defend themselves and go its not my problem and walk away. Maybe ask south korea if the americans helped them? How about germany, japan, all of europe. If you read what i said the pew pew kewl as you call it is the easy part. The staying and actually helping is hard and takes awhile.

 

[Walpknut]

I assume outside the internet you are the kind of person who can't think rationally and just makes a lot of assumptions based on emotion who also makes a lot of false equivalences as a second nature.

You gotta be pretty stupid to think the US fucking over countries with invasions and overreaching military actions is the same as helping someone.

 

[GonZo_626]

I assume outside the internet you are the kind of person who can't think rationally and just makes a lot of assumptions based on emotion who also makes a lot of false equivalences as a second nature.

You gotta be pretty stupid to think the US fucking over countries with invasions and overreaching military actions is the same as helping someone.

YOu seem to not be able to have a discussion involving any rational thinking and provide zero evidence your model works. Also you must be insane to want to watch other people get murdered by their government while you sit in comfort. Actually would say its pretty sadistic.

I get that the US should not just go around fucking up everything they see but you cant honestly think nothing should be done about governments slaughtering their own people. It also seems as though econmic sanctions have zero impact on these dickheads that run these countries and are very hard on the people that live there as the rich and powerful generally still get what they want. So what do you purpose? What option do you have? Someone on the "security" council of the un always seems to block anything they try to do making the UN useless.

 

[Walpknut]

Zero evidence. Like the amount of evidence they had before they launched the military strike? Would you ram your car into a crowd because you heard a mugger is among it? Because that's what this is. No investigation, no consultation, reckless actions and we can only imagine the long term repercutions. But I guess you still think this is about the guy who literally said "I will look into kid refugee's faces and tell them they can't come in!" suddenly developing a heroic streak.

Blocking reckless military actions that result in war is what the UN is for, they aren't there to aprove all pew pew pews. They are useless because the US seldomly respects international law. And you applaud them even tho most of the instability in the Middle Easy is the direct result of Western powers meddling for less than altruistic reasons.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I get that the US should not just go around fucking up everything they see but you cant honestly think nothing should be done about governments slaughtering their own people.

The whole problem though, this kind of thinking is what got us here in the first place. Even if I would believe in this "good intentions" bullshit, the track record here is extremly bad.

if this was some kind of science experiment you would have at some point come to the conclussion that military actions simply most of the time do not lead to the desired results. Nations and people simply don't work that way. And if you look at the history of the middle east and actually think for a moment than you might realize why many of those people actually prefer their homegrown dictators to our 'democracy' which has done them more harm than good.

A forced democracy or liberation simply isn't one. It wasn't like that after WW2 and it isn't today. And the US is not better compared to the Soviets or other powers in that part, look at South Korea after WW2 for example. If you want a REAL democracy, than you HAVE to give people the choice to also vote AGAINST a democracy, as paradox that sounds, but you can not talk about a choice here if the situation is like someone pointing with a gun at your head, you could always try to go with the option he doesn't like ... but that's not really much of a choice. Democracy at the very least a liberal one has to grow on it's own and come from the population, democratic institutions aren't worth their salt if it isn't backed up the people which actually trust in them, and I am not talking about the parliament or senate - most of the US populatoin doesn't trust them either, what I am talking about is on a more local level, with mayors, government officials and offices, like the police for example. Those have to be for the most part free from corruption and supported by the population.

And that is something the american population and parts of Europe has to finally understand. Those are different cultures with a different history we can't just get in there, blow everything away and then run around like crazy when they 'ellect' religious nutjobs or dictators as leaders, because that's what they grew up with and they simply don't know it better.

Funny enough, the nation which saw the least western influence, Iran is also one of the most stable nations down there.

I am with Noam Chomsky on this one, when he said that actually if we would seriously stay true to the values we preach every American President of recent history would be charged with war crimes.

I think the Ukrainians would disagree with this. I mean Russia actually invaded their neighbor, and has continually supported rebel movements within the Ukraine with violence. They have also not followed any international agreements with this and are treating them the same as the US treats the middle east. The difference being the middle east is actually a very fucked up place, not a peaceful neighbor.

Oh please ... just answer one thing.

Who was really behind the Euromaidan shootings? This even today is still very unclear and strange enough no one ever really wanted to see it solved. Both the US and Russia are to blame here. Who's more responsible? I don't know it, nor is that really important in the big picture.

Politics as we see here is often one that comes with a history, actions and reactions. The Sovietunion collapsed and the NATO expanded into the east, everyone with half a brain could see that this would at some point create a Russian reaction which lead to the situation like we saw in Ukraine. A lot of American politicans are playing literaly with the fire, and I am actually worried how long China and Russia will take it before they decide to seriously fight back one way or another. This american Hegemony is really getting to a dangerous level.

I don't hold some huge love for either Russia or China, but you have to see the situation from their side as well since they are facing a world power here that spends a tremendous amount of resources for their military and they have no qualms in using that military to influence states, like we saw in Yugoslavia, the Middleeast and parts of Asia. From their point of view, the US is the agressor, and they actually have a point here.

 

[DarkCorp]

BLM isn't a single, organized entity, has no defined leader, no defined game plan, and no agreed upon rule set on what is an acceptable form of protest and what isn't.

Also, people already condemn BLM, at least ordinary folks. Politicians on the other hand, have to be very careful in what they say as their careers are often at stake. Also, politicians are easier targets, open to attack and so if they accuse BLM of something negative, their defenders will simply bring up what I did above.

I would agree the Trump phenomenon was a partial response to Bernie Panders along with general discontent with 8 years of Obama, along with everything else brought up already.

Trump was also elected because of the progressives, like the Bernie or Bust movement, who would rather stay home, write in, or vote Jill Stein, rather than vote Democrat.



Come on, let us be honest, Iran WAS effected by the West, and it wasn't necessarily all bad either. One could make a compelling argument that western intervention made Iran much stronger compared to some of its neighbors. To only speak about the negatives of Pahlavi without mentioning the good he did as well, would be nothing short of disengenous. The Shah was a major proponent of modernization and strengthening Iran, albeit with a western instead of Russian influence. His arms purchases gave Iran one of, if not, THE, most modern military armed forces in the ME. He made sweeping land reforms, along with other social programs aimed at helping the disenfranchised.

If we are to be honest, then let us admit that the ME, due to many different factors, mostly involving tribalism and sectarianism, opened the area to proxy warfare between the bigger powers.

People may not want to hear this but there will always be a pecking order in the world and it is up to the leadership of nations to determine which place they have on this global order. The time of the Romans, WW1 and 2, the cold war, the present, etc. Ever since the fall of the Persian Empire, the ME has been a battleground of bigger powers, even more so with the discovery and need of oil.

Putin has always had big plans for Russia, regardless of the west. His SU speech, as I have brought up time and time again, laments on how its dissolution made Russia very weak. In other words, Russia became weak due to its inability to dominate its neighbors.

China? China has ALWAYS had an issue with Taiwan, along with a secondary issue with Japan, for its actions during WW2. You also have the Sino-Indian issue as well, the list goes on and on. Let us also not forget about the good old, commie on commie violence with the Sino-Vietnamese war and the border skirmishes with the SU, they also deserve to be mentioned. Without US influence, the PRC would be more than happy to exert its influence in the Asian sphere.

Ever since the beginning of time, there has been a battle for hegemony. Even if we were to enter a hypothetical scenario where the west and America lost the cold war, I have no doubt in my mind the SU or the PRC would be doing the exact same shit to the ME and elsewhere as we do today.

 

[CaptJ]

Terrorism my friend, do you know how it works?

My point was they weren't hiding the fact that they are doing it and they are doing it where everyone can see them do it in the process of doing it like a public execution.

What's your point? That a movement can't be subject to gross generalisation and/or oversymplification?

By the opposite side spectrum, the acts of an individual can't reflect on the movement especially the movement has no real leaders. Either way it doesn't stop people justifying their violent actions.
http://time.com/3605606/ferguson-in-defense-of-rioting/

Again I can NOT(!) expect a society without crime, racism and other issues, but I can expect from a society to try to IMPROVE on it, the way as how we have IMPROVED over the last at least 70 years after WW2.

First of all, how do you expect people to fix a problem without a plan? Second, people are trying. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't. People tried blind interviews to reduce discriminatory hiring but apparently it can be used as an excuse to ignore diversity quotas.

Also, people already condemn BLM, at least ordinary folks. Politicians on the other hand, have to be very careful in what they say as their careers are often at stake. Also, politicians are easier targets, open to attack and so if they accuse BLM of something negative, their defenders will simply bring up what I did above.

So it is okay because people with no power criticize the movement?

No one said that what we experience today would be as bad like in the deepest corner of the american south of the 1950s.

Because Americans don't go around lynching Black people anymore. Because American society isn't racist enough for that anymore. Because society has improved in that regard. This is a measure that things improved. It does actually matter whether it is lynching or not. Those things are not lynchings.

Rubber bands with swastikas on them.

Said the guy who believe in Zionist conspiracies. Do you believe that they dip matzah into the blood of children too?

Sorry, no one NO ONE is buying this bullshit of help, humanitarian aid or what ever anymore. Not with Obama, not with Bush and not with Trump either. At this point the US is just the same kind of bully like all the others.

It is about the oil money. If it was humanitarian, America would have invaded somewhere like North Korea. But then again nukes.

Ah yes because we all know its the US's responsibility to intervene in other nations affairs and that's totally not a colonialists or imperialist mentality what so ever.

Trump literally was pushing for stealing Iraqi oil because it was somehow theirs. Or trump saying Iran has been taking over Iraq lol.

The sad thing is that it is status quo.

Trump was also elected because of the progressives, like the Bernie or Bust movement, who would rather stay home, write in, or vote Jill Stein, rather than vote Democrat.

I don't like Bernie but I think he would have won if he had the Democrat party nomination. I honestly don't know what other candidate other than Hillary could have lost to Trump.

Even Milo Yiannopulous is afraid.

Who gets the reference?

You know there is a reason why people avoid the low hang fruit.

 

[Crni Vuk]

My point was they weren't hiding the fact that they are doing it and they are doing it where everyone can see them do it in the process of doing it like a public execution.

A group of hooded figures where you can't see the their faces, burning a cross at night infront of a church full of black people with the intention to terrorize them, maybe even killing someone, isn't exactly what you consider a 'public' event. At least I don't know anyone who would consider it as that. For someone who's so hung up on what constitutes as 'lynching' you really should know the difference. Besides the KKK has 'lynched' quite a lot of people, without anyone around, I mean com a group of people killing 2 or 3 guys in the middle of the night ... that's not 'public' execution. Maybe you forgot what an actual public execution/event looks like?

A very big difference to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Chaney#Murder

Or this:

I am pretty sure those people, welcome the FBI or authorities or any minority walking in to their 'public' event. Or what is more likely, they would flee the scene faster than cockroaches when you turn on the light, if the FBI showed up on their little 'public' meeting.

By the opposite side spectrum, the acts of an individual can't reflect on the movement especially the movement has no real leaders. Either way it doesn't stop people justifying their violent actions.

You really have a talent for this. You're constantly missing (or dodging) the point on this.

- generalization.

A generalization is taking one or a few facts and making a broader, more universal statement. If all the girls you know play with dolls, you might make the generalization that all girls play with dolls. Scientists try to make generalizations based on research — the more data they have, the more accurate the generalization. Generalizations can be similar to stereotypes in that they are sometimes wrong and harmful. Usually, it's best to stick with specifics and avoid generalizations.​

This is something that can be applied to almost any kind of group, organisation or well people.

This ins't exactly rocket science you know. I am literaly working with 12 year old children that understand it better than you do.

Because Americans don't go around lynching Black people anymore. Because American society isn't racist enough for that anymore. Because society has improved in that regard. This is a measure that things improved. It does actually matter whether it is lynching or not. Those things are not lynchings.

Not with your definition probably, but that still doesn't change the fact that black people and minorities are killed. We are not in the 1950s and I don't think anyone here ever said we are.