NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-10-2016, 08:19 PM
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
Great article but this line, early on, grabbed me.

China: “They are ripping us. We are rebuilding China. We’re rebuilding many countries. China, you go there now, roads, bridges, schools, you never saw anything like it.”

Yes, China invests in these projects. Republicunt politicians only worry about more tax cuts for the rich and pissing more money away on the military.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
22-10-2016, 11:55 PM (This post was last modified: 23-10-2016 12:28 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
(22-10-2016 12:02 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(22-10-2016 02:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  What's the real purpose of this post of yours? It doesn't inform, it doesn't enlighten.
It was a question, meant to illicit information rather than to bestow information.

You seem a bit precious about the image of your country.

No, I just find it annoying when people get on a soapbaox ... especially when they're not armed with more facts.

As for precious about my country's image, I'd suggest you reread the opening two lines of my reply you quoted, this time for comprehension.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2016, 12:22 AM
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
(22-10-2016 02:17 PM)Gloucester Wrote:  Grant you that, when Britain was just about the strongest power in the world, when its empire was at its peak. Now we are virtual has-beens, trying hard to stay up with the big guys but, basically, unable to cope with our own internal problems, unable to devote the kind of resources a modern armed forces system needs etc, etc.

I am refering more to the everyday interactions with those in other cultures. Though not always applied correctly we have, simply due to our imperial history, rather more experience of assessing cultural climates and dealing with them. There are times when you have to just go along with the locals wants (not needs) and not try to imposed your own culture [/size], from what I saw in footage and reports from the early days in Iraq and Afghanistan, is what America seems to think was the only way. Throw enough dollars at it and it is solved. No, the dollars end up in the accounts of the most corrupt, not where they are needed most.

Were y'all not involved in invading Iraq?

No doubt that the American government has been harnessed by big business, which is precisely why I was thrilled when my son told me he wouldn't entertain the thought of joining the military -- I've no desire to see him maimed or killed over business interests.

I agree that America is far too often meddlesome, and I definitely agree that this idea of imposing democracy at gun point is silly beyond words. If you'll allow me to quote a passage I wrote back in 2001:

Quote:It wasn't until much later, after we returned to America, that the thought crossed my mind that my dad's behavior that night may encapsulate the reasons why Westernization in general and Americans in particular were so terribly resented by Iranians. To his son, of course, my dad could do no wrong; even though he tried to tell me otherwise, in his own fashion, I still at the time regarded him as pretty damned close to infallible. But looking back on it later, I could see that the appalling arrogance of his actions were really synecdoche for the way our country treats most of the rest of the world, particularly the under-developed parts of it. And that was certainly the case in Iran, where we forced an autocratic monarch upon a people, for our own ends, with little thought and less concern for the will of the people there. In this case, our thirst for cheaper oil and our geopolitical goals regarding Russia combined to damn the
Iranians to the fear of secret police and, eventually, to an equally dreaded and despised religious government. I'm still of the opinion that if we as a country truly desire peace for that troubled part of the world -- or any other -- then we should export democratic principles and respect for human rights along with missile batteries and the jet fighters that they shoot down. As trite and simplistic as that may read, I firmly believe that a major reason for the terrorism directed against us is the fact that our high words and ideals rarely are matched by our deeds. We talk a great deal about freedom, equality, and the rule of law, and we point to the ideals ensconced in our Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights; but when these principles collide with our economic or geopolitical goals, they are invariably shunted aside in favor of a convenient alliance with a tyrant, who ends up in the scrap-heap of history along with our long-term goals. This is borne out with dismaying frequency in our history. I was to see this for myself in 1978.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Sorry, this was not a personal attack on your attitudes to your country but about us non-Americans having no right of interest in what you guys do over there. As I said later so long as America wants to be a global power and a large influence on what other countries do - which has been part of the pattern since WW2 at least - we also have a distinct right of interest on anything that happens in America that might influence its foreign policy.

Of course, I get that. It's the same reason more Americans ought to at least read a little more about Russian or Chinese politics and actions.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  For my part the whole structure of any society, or nation, goes down to bedrock, the people in the street who vote the people in authority over them who control that foreign policy. If Joe and Joan Public, or a large enough mass of Joe and Joan Publics, make enough noise it ripples up the ladder to the top. Thus my interest in your elections and a strong wish for Trump to get flattened under that landslide. Clinton we know something of. I think we can work with Clinton.

I've no doubt that's the case. As much as Clinton herself is far too interventionist for my taste, Trump would be an unmitigated disaster for America, both in domestic and foreign spheres.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Had to fire up the old tablet so I could read Stevil's post as I type!

Hmm,

[quote='Gloucester' pid='1077931' dateline='1477125933']Some sympathy with what he says about the gun lovers, they still bother me but that is partly a cultural thing. I actually do love guns but see no need for the man in the street to carry one, except for the wholly created, artificial need for protection against the other man in the street who carries one! Kind of feedback that goes wrong now and again.
[/quote]

My point is, does that affect him? Or is it simply a talking point he uses in order to leverage moral ascendency? I personally think it's the latter.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  But with the kind of warfare that can create 9/11 and all the other attrocities, as we see them, fleets of battle tanks and squadrons of ground attack aircraft are useless.America, and the rest of the world, is possibly going to have to rethink the whole picture when a few thousand can effectively hold a nation of millions hostage if it goes about it the right way.

Surely; but then we look at China growling over international waters, and wonder over the wisdom of cutting defense too deeply. This is a ripple effect from WWII, when we were wholly unprepared when it broke out in 1939, and even by our entry in 1941, were still militarily backwards. Eisenhower's words about the military-industrial complex were indeed prescient -- but it doesn't seem that many listened; they still hearkened to fears of surprise attack, this time from the USSR ... and the businessmen who had access to the corridors of power wanted to keep the assembly-lines humming.

We could certainly trim our defense budget by quite a bit, but then that would require, say, the EU spending more to ensure its security against a Russia that doesn't seem to have many scruples about returning to its own past as a Great Power.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  America's once overwhelming wealth, commercial clout and numbers of people under arms gave it authority so far. The armed, political and commercial clout will not defend it against assymetric warfare without draconian regulation (a la Trump). I think it has yet to realise, or admit, this.

I wish we'd tone down the emphasis on military response, myself. We're falling afoul of Maslow's Hammer -- "we've got all this stuff, surely it can fix the problem."

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Yet I am allowed my opinion on a democratic forum am I not? Difficult which of our countries have the mot excess baggage to haul around without studying far more history and doing far more analysis than I have stamina for these days!

Of course you can, and are, voicing your opinion ... as am I. The right to an opinion does not convey the right to not have that opinion questioned, though -- and we both are doing that too.

I kinda like this free-expression stuff. It's enjoyable, and when (as is the case here) your interlocutor is both informed and civil, I learn a lot.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  For as long as America expects special treatment in world courts and markets by dint of its size and history it is not part of the real world.

[quote='Gloucester' pid='1077931' dateline='1477125933']

OK, glad I am at the end of this, my shoulders and back are seriously giving me hell.

I am as objective about the UK as you seem to be about the US, both our countries have serious warts, but we do not, can not, pretend to be the global influence that America still likes to think it is. Yes, still just about the largest Western influence but China is working very hard to grab as much of the world's resources and influence as it can. In two minds as to what it will do then but I would lay money that neither the West and its allies in the East nor Russia will enjoy it.

Too tired to look for errors, please forgive those Big Grin

No problem. I'm really concerned about China, definitely; but our days as world guardian are behind us. If you read Kennedy's somewhat dated but still insightful (and prescient itself) book The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, he has a concept and the center of his theme, that of "imperial overstretch" -- how throughout history, empires which have overinvested militarily do themselves a grave disservice. I think we are seeing my country at the boundary of that effect and will be shrinking away from the world -- and I cetainly hope I'm right about that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2016, 04:28 AM (This post was last modified: 23-10-2016 02:53 PM by Gloucester.)
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
See below

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gloucester's post
23-10-2016, 04:30 AM (This post was last modified: 23-10-2016 04:44 AM by DLJ.)
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
(23-10-2016 12:22 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(22-10-2016 02:17 PM)Gloucester Wrote:  Grant you that, when Britain was just about the strongest power in the world, when its empire was at its peak. Now we are virtual has-beens, trying hard to stay up with the big guys but, basically, unable to cope with our own internal problems, unable to devote the kind of resources a modern armed forces system needs etc, etc.

I am refering more to the everyday interactions with those in other cultures. Though not always applied correctly we have, simply due to our imperial history, rather more experience of assessing cultural climates and dealing with them. There are times when you have to just go along with the locals wants (not needs) and not try to imposed your own culture [/size], from what I saw in footage and reports from the early days in Iraq and Afghanistan, is what America seems to think was the only way. Throw enough dollars at it and it is solved. No, the dollars end up in the accounts of the most corrupt, not where they are needed most.

Were y'all not involved in invading Iraq?

No doubt that the American government has been harnessed by big business, which is precisely why I was thrilled when my son told me he wouldn't entertain the thought of joining the military -- I've no desire to see him maimed or killed over business interests.

I agree that America is far too often meddlesome, and I definitely agree that this idea of imposing democracy at gun point is silly beyond words. If you'll allow me to quote a passage I wrote back in 2001:

Quote:It wasn't until much later, after we returned to America, that the thought crossed my mind that my dad's behavior that night may encapsulate the reasons why Westernization in general and Americans in particular were so terribly resented by Iranians. To his son, of course, my dad could do no wrong; even though he tried to tell me otherwise, in his own fashion, I still at the time regarded him as pretty damned close to infallible. But looking back on it later, I could see that the appalling arrogance of his actions were really synecdoche for the way our country treats most of the rest of the world, particularly the under-developed parts of it. And that was certainly the case in Iran, where we forced an autocratic monarch upon a people, for our own ends, with little thought and less concern for the will of the people there. In this case, our thirst for cheaper oil and our geopolitical goals regarding Russia combined to damn the
Iranians to the fear of secret police and, eventually, to an equally dreaded and despised religious government. I'm still of the opinion that if we as a country truly desire peace for that troubled part of the world -- or any other -- then we should export democratic principles and respect for human rights along with missile batteries and the jet fighters that they shoot down. As trite and simplistic as that may read, I firmly believe that a major reason for the terrorism directed against us is the fact that our high words and ideals rarely are matched by our deeds. We talk a great deal about freedom, equality, and the rule of law, and we point to the ideals ensconced in our Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights; but when these principles collide with our economic or geopolitical goals, they are invariably shunted aside in favor of a convenient alliance with a tyrant, who ends up in the scrap-heap of history along with our long-term goals. This is borne out with dismaying frequency in our history. I was to see this for myself in 1978.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Sorry, this was not a personal attack on your attitudes to your country but about us non-Americans having no right of interest in what you guys do over there. As I said later so long as America wants to be a global power and a large influence on what other countries do - which has been part of the pattern since WW2 at least - we also have a distinct right of interest on anything that happens in America that might influence its foreign policy.

Of course, I get that. It's the same reason more Americans ought to at least read a little more about Russian or Chinese politics and actions.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  For my part the whole structure of any society, or nation, goes down to bedrock, the people in the street who vote the people in authority over them who control that foreign policy. If Joe and Joan Public, or a large enough mass of Joe and Joan Publics, make enough noise it ripples up the ladder to the top. Thus my interest in your elections and a strong wish for Trump to get flattened under that landslide. Clinton we know something of. I think we can work with Clinton.

I've no doubt that's the case. As much as Clinton herself is far too interventionist for my taste, Trump would be an unmitigated disaster for America, both in domestic and foreign spheres.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Had to fire up the old tablet so I could read Stevil's post as I type!

Hmm,

My point is, does that affect him? Or is it simply a talking point he uses in order to leverage moral ascendency? I personally think it's the latter.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  But with the kind of warfare that can create 9/11 and all the other attrocities, as we see them, fleets of battle tanks and squadrons of ground attack aircraft are useless.America, and the rest of the world, is possibly going to have to rethink the whole picture when a few thousand can effectively hold a nation of millions hostage if it goes about it the right way.

Surely; but then we look at China growling over international waters, and wonder over the wisdom of cutting defense too deeply. This is a ripple effect from WWII, when we were wholly unprepared when it broke out in 1939, and even by our entry in 1941, were still militarily backwards. Eisenhower's words about the military-industrial complex were indeed prescient -- but it doesn't seem that many listened; they still hearkened to fears of surprise attack, this time from the USSR ... and the businessmen who had access to the corridors of power wanted to keep the assembly-lines humming.

We could certainly trim our defense budget by quite a bit, but then that would require, say, the EU spending more to ensure its security against a Russia that doesn't seem to have many scruples about returning to its own past as a Great Power.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  America's once overwhelming wealth, commercial clout and numbers of people under arms gave it authority so far. The armed, political and commercial clout will not defend it against assymetric warfare without draconian regulation (a la Trump). I think it has yet to realise, or admit, this.

I wish we'd tone down the emphasis on military response, myself. We're falling afoul of Maslow's Hammer -- "we've got all this stuff, surely it can fix the problem."

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Yet I am allowed my opinion on a democratic forum am I not? Difficult which of our countries have the mot excess baggage to haul around without studying far more history and doing far more analysis than I have stamina for these days!

Of course you can, and are, voicing your opinion ... as am I. The right to an opinion does not convey the right to not have that opinion questioned, though -- and we both are doing that too.

I kinda like this free-expression stuff. It's enjoyable, and when (as is the case here) your interlocutor is both informed and civil, I learn a lot.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  For as long as America expects special treatment in world courts and markets by dint of its size and history it is not part of the real world.

(22-10-2016 02:45 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  OK, glad I am at the end of this, my shoulders and back are seriously giving me hell.

I am as objective about the UK as you seem to be about the US, both our countries have serious warts, but we do not, can not, pretend to be the global influence that America still likes to think it is. Yes, still just about the largest Western influence but China is working very hard to grab as much of the world's resources and influence as it can. In two minds as to what it will do then but I would lay money that neither the West and its allies in the East nor Russia will enjoy it.

Too tired to look for errors, please forgive those Big Grin

No problem. I'm really concerned about China, definitely; but our days as world guardian are behind us. If you read Kennedy's somewhat dated but still insightful (and prescient itself) book The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, he has a concept and the center of his theme, that of "imperial overstretch" -- how throughout history, empires which have overinvested militarily do themselves a grave disservice. I think we are seeing my country at the boundary of that effect and will be shrinking away from the world -- and I cetainly hope I'm right about that.

I find no further significant argument Smile

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gloucester's post
23-10-2016, 04:31 AM (This post was last modified: 23-10-2016 02:54 PM by Gloucester.)
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
Oooer
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2016, 10:02 AM
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
lol, that's an artifact of you fluffing the quote-tags, bud. I had to edit mine with a fine-tooth comb to get it to show up, but after all that damned typing, no way I was gonna look at blank screen!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2016, 02:40 PM
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
(22-10-2016 11:55 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(22-10-2016 12:02 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It was a question, meant to illicit information rather than to bestow information.

You seem a bit precious about the image of your country.

No, I just find it annoying when people get on a soapbaox ... especially when they're not armed with more facts.

As for precious about my country's image, I'd suggest you reread the opening two lines of my reply you quoted, this time for comprehension.
Perhaps you ought to re-read my post that you got all pissy about. This time concentrate on your own comprehension.

FFS what a dick!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2016, 02:59 PM
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
(23-10-2016 10:02 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  lol, that's an artifact of you fluffing the quote-tags, bud. I had to edit mine with a fine-tooth comb to get it to show up, but after all that damned typing, no way I was gonna look at blank screen!

Ah! I had to zoom of soon after and have just caught up.

All I did was hit the "Reply" button on your post so any quote errors were not mine! Copied from quoted post!

Tongue

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gloucester's post
23-10-2016, 03:33 PM
RE: NY Daily News' epic DJT takedown
I mean , Thumpalumpacus, with regards to your response to my original post.


(22-10-2016 02:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  "Being a beacon" is not the mission of any nation-state. I don't carewhat any foreigner thinks of America. I care what America thinks of, and does in the name of, itself.

We're not a beacon, and we should not be one. Why should you look to America for anything?
I don't look to America for anything other than head scratching laughs.

My post was with regards to a comment in the article that a link was provided to, within the original post of this thread.
Quote:gotten so close to leading the globe’s beacon of democracy
It struck me as an odd thing for someone to say, so it prompted me to ask the question, whether Americans consider USA to be a beacon of democracy.


(22-10-2016 02:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  You live in a democracy yourself; vote as you wish and work on your own corner of the world (not to say you haven't).

You don't live here; you don't have to deal with it. What, exactly, are you upset about?
What on earth gave you the idea that I was upset about anything?


(22-10-2016 02:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  That we're more religious than most first-world nations? Well, that ain't your horse; why are you saddling up?
What? Don't know what you are talking about.

(22-10-2016 02:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  That we own guns in large numbers? Last I checked, bullets don't range 7,000 miles. If that's your issue, I'd tell you to move far away ... but you already live far away.
I mean, it really seems strange to me that you take such offense to me stating that USA is a beacon for religious nut jobs and people that like guns. It's just facts right? Why get troubled because I point out some facts? Why then come back and get focused on me, Saying that "I'm saddling up".

It's like you have such a thin skin, thin skin for any criticism of your country.
Ray Comfort a religious nut job from NZ, goes to USA because USA is a beacon for his nuttiness. Same for Australia's Ken Ham.

I didn't even say anything derogatory regarding guns or gun owners, I just stated that people who like guns and like to carry would find USA to be a beacon. You can't walk around in NZ carrying loaded weapons in public, you can't walk around with pistols or AR-15's so those people would likely hate NZ, USA is where they would get the freedom to do what they want with guns.


(22-10-2016 02:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  What's the real purpose of this post of yours? It doesn't inform, it doesn't enlighten.
And the purpose of my post was extremely clear. I was wanting to know if other Americans thought that USA was a beacon for democracy. It was clearly a question rather than with intent to inform or enlighten others.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: