• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Election: 2016

tomahawk6 said:
Before Obama Libya,Syria and Iraq were relatively stable.After Obama engineered the so called arab spring there remains two stable countries SA and Israel.The jury is out on Turkey.
at the time

"Relatively stable" is a subjective term so there isn't much sense arguing about it. In April of 2008 Petraeus urged congress to delay troop withdrawals, saying, "I've repeatedly noted that we haven't turned any corners, we haven't seen any lights at the end of the tunnel". By Feb 2009 Obama announced the US would end combat operation by 31 Aug 2010. I can concede that for a brief time, Iraq had a measure of stability it didn't have during the period from the Bush invasion and the debacle of the L Paul Bremer's Coalition Provisional Authority and up to 2008 and then after 2011.

I strongly disagree with the suggestion that Obama "engineered" the Arab Spring. It started more or less spontaneously in Tunisia on Dec 18th, 2010 with the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi and carried on in cascading protests that spread to Algeria, Jordan, Oman, Egypt, Yemen, Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan, Egypt, Bahrain, Libyia, Kuwait, Morocco, Mauritania, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the UAE, and Palestine. I have seen no evidence that the US "engineered" these events but only that they had to quickly learn to react and tread the narrow path in providing humanitarian support and in fostering the movements for democratic government. I think that the issues facing the US at the time were best summed up by Henry Kissinger in an article in early 2012 where he stated at the end:

The U.S. conduct during the Arab upheavals has so far been successful in avoiding placing America as an obstacle to the revolutionary transformations. This is not a minor achievement. But it is just one component of a successful approach. U.S. policy will, in the end, also be judged by whether what emerges from the Arab Spring improves the reformed states’ responsibility towards the international order and humane institutions.

http://www.henryakissinger.com/articles/iht040212.html

I think reasonable persons may argue as to how successful or not the Obama administration was in responding to the Arab Spring but I would suggest that to say they "engineered" it is going too far.

:cheers:
 
FJAG said:
I think reasonable persons may argue as to how successful or not the Obama administration was in responding to the Arab Spring but I would suggest that to say they "engineered" it is going too far.

What? GlobalResearch.ca isn't a reasonable website run by reasonable people? Sounds pretty legit to me...

The Arab Spring: Made in the USA

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-arab-spring-made-in-the-usa/5484950

 
Lumber said:
What? GlobalResearch.ca isn't a reasonable website run by reasonable people? Sounds pretty legit to me...

The Arab Spring: Made in the USA

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-arab-spring-made-in-the-usa/5484950

I haven't read the book, just the review that you link to and based on that I'm not so sure that a book that is "Relying mainly on Wikileaks cables and the websites of key CIA pass through foundations (which he reproduces in the appendix)" is authoritative. That said, if one accepts Bensada then:

None [of the revolutions] were spontaneous – all required careful and lengthy (5+ years) planning, by the State Department, CIA pass through foundations, George Soros, and the pro-Israel lobby.1

and:

Between 2005 and 2010, the State Department funneled (sic) $12 million to opposition groups opposed to Assad.

Ergo, if one follows Bensada's logic then the foundations for the Arab Spring were laid by the Bush administration.

I don't doubt that various US agencies had, over the several decades before the Arab Spring been generally in contact with and provided some funds (and $12 million over five years is a very small amount) to democracy oriented individuals and groups and the Middle East. That doesn't equate to "Obama engineered" the Arab Spring.

:cheers:
 
milnews.ca said:
OK, I'll be "that" guy and ask:  are you serious, or just being sarcastic?
If I missed the <sarcasm>, my apologies - otherwise, caveat lector ...

:sarcasm:

Mind you, as far as conspiracy theories go, I'm starting to believe more and more each day (although it's still a very small belief) that Trump is intentionally attempting to sewer his own campaign.

The scary part, for me, is that even if Trump was not playing fair and intentionally trying to lose, he has in the process lent a voice and a level of legitimacy to a cadre of the American public that is just down right ignorant. When, god be willing, Trump loses the election, and again, god willing, the Republicans fix their s***, do you think this cadre of yokels is just going to quietly sit back down?
 
Is there a link to Trump's speech where he said he might ban immigration from the PI and elsewhere ?
 
tomahawk6 said:
Is there a link to Trump's speech where he said he might ban immigration from the PI and elsewhere ?
Haven't seen a transcript out there, but the speech (4 Aug, Portland, Maine) appears to be here at YouTube in its entirety (~50 minutes).
Lumber said:
:sarcasm:
Good to hear.
 
I'd suppose a much higher likelihood of conviction following impeachment if Trump is president than if Clinton is president.

Either one of them is damaging - my view is that for the sake of rule of law, the US really needs to show that it can end the Clintons - but some Republicans would work against Trump, and I doubt any Democrats would work against Clinton.  The lack of a prospective corrective capability - safety valve - is really the deciding factor in choosing the lesser of two evils.
 
If you havn't already done so, I would suggest that you cash in your RRSP's and invest in Alcoa as fast as you can.

Now that the CEO of Brietbart is now running the Trump campaign, tin foil sales are going to go through the roof. I am already hearing rumours of long lineups at Walmarts waiting for new shipments to come in.

Just when I thought this cycle could not get any more entertaining, he had to go and up the anty.

:Tin-Foil-Hat:
 
cupper said:
I'll try to be less condesending and more patronizing. ;D
Good luck with that;  sometimes you just find yourself in a target-rich environment.  :nod:
 
Thoughts, cupper?

Washington Post

Trump suggests racial profiling and says of Omar Mateen’s father, ‘I’d throw him out’

The Washington Post
Aaron Blake
2 hrs ago


In case there was any doubt that Donald Trump was going to keep charting his own, controversial course for the remainder of the 2016 campaign, he erased it in an interview airing Wednesday night.

Speaking to Fox News's Sean Hannity during an hour-long town hall that was recorded Tuesday and aired Wednesday, Trump opened the door to racial profiling in order to prevent terrorism.

Trump called for Muslims to help root out terrorism and suggested he would be in favor of profiling to stop terrorist attacks in the United States. He said Muslims bear responsibility for not proactively flagging potential terrorists.

(...SNIPPED)
 
S.M.A. said:

He's got to get elected first.

And although I've said before polls this far out really are not that helpful, the trend is certainly alarming for Trump, and more importantly the down ballot GOP candidates.

And even if the nightmare became reality, it would never stand up to a constitutional challenge.
 
From May, but still relevant. 

"Why Trump voters are not 'complete idiots'".

You can scrap this entire analysis as silly if you want, but please try and understand the core point missing from much of the current dialogue — large parts of the US have become completely isolated, socially and economically.

Kids are growing up in towns where by six, or seven, or eleven, they are doomed to be viewed as second class. They feel unvalued. They feel stuck. They are mocked. And there is nothing they feel they can do about it.

When they turn to religion for worth, they are seen by the elites as uneducated, irrational, clowns. When they turn to identity through race they are racists. Regardless of their color.

The only thing they can do, faced with that, is break the f***ing system. And they are going to try. Either by Trump or by some other way.

https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/trump-politics-and-option-pricing-or-why-trump-voters-are-not-idiots-1e364a4ed940#.ynpytlana
 
Dimsum said:
From May, but still relevant. 

"Why Trump voters are not 'complete idiots'".

https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/trump-politics-and-option-pricing-or-why-trump-voters-are-not-idiots-1e364a4ed940#.ynpytlana

Oh, Boy. I promised myself to hold back on this thread but this post got me antsy.

Firstly I do buy into the genral premise of this article that individuals, for the most part, want to move themselves "to the right" ie better themselves and their family's position in life. Much of the rest I think misunderstands society in general.

You can scrap this entire analysis as silly if you want, but please try and understand the core point missing from much of the current dialogue — large parts of the US have become completely isolated, socially and economically.

I don't think that "large parts of the US have become completely isolated, socially and economically ...". If you look back fifty years and more you'll see that there always was a divide between the richer and more affluent elements of society. What happened after WW2 was that large parts of the poor class moved upward leaving other elements behind. The big point though is that we generally accepted our lots in life. Growing up in the Fifties all of my schoolmates and friends came from the same economic class as myself and we never really were dissatisfied because, in large part, we didn't know better. Communications these days are all pervasive (even for the poor country cousins) and now everyone who doesn't reach Kim Kardashian wealth levels feels that they are being "held back by the man". It's not isolation, but too much communication and too great a feeling of entitlement that fuels dissatisfaction.

Kids are growing up in towns where by six, or seven, or eleven, they are doomed to be viewed as second class. They feel unvalued. They feel stuck. They are mocked. And there is nothing they feel they can do about it.

See Kim Kardashian above. They are not mocked but may very well consider themselves looked down on. There is an answer for that: education and hard work. The trouble is that a large part of our society resists being educated and turns to disablers such as toxic relationships , drugs and alcohol which will ensure that they will never move to the right.

When they turn to religion for worth, they are seen by the elites as uneducated, irrational, clowns. When they turn to identity through race they are racists. Regardless of their color.

I disagree that the "elites" take this view. In fact in much of the US, the so-called elite is, or at least pretends to be, highly religious. It is quite appropriate however to question why individuals govern themselves and attempt to govern others with various faith-based belief systems that were designed for nomadic shepherds thousands of years ago. Over a century ago Karl Marx stated that "religion is the opiate of the masses". He was right then. It continues to amaze me that with all the knowledge that is available to everyone these days that there are still tens or more of millions of people allow themselves to become indoctrinated and stay tied to such systems. One doesn't consider them uneducated or clowns but one does question their ability to think rationally.

The only thing they can do, faced with that, is break the f***ing system. And they are going to try. Either by Trump or by some other way.

This is another sign of how some people refuse to be educated, or at least refuse to learn from history. The most simple study shows that "breaking the system" in an anarchic sense leads to a decrease in the standard of life for the vast majority of the populace and particularly for the lower classes for a significant period of time. If your aim is to guard the hen house from coyotes, why would you elect a coyote to be the hen house guard? The policies being expounded by Trump do not demonstrate a logical path to increased opportunities or a bettering of the opportunities for the individuals the author is writing about. It is simply an attempt to leverage fears (some rational some highly irrational) that exists within segments of the American society.

So (with due respect to others who might differ) Trump voters aren't "complete idiots" but one has to question their ability to analyse issues and evaluate them rationally. One may be tempted to take God on faith but it would be suicide to do the same with Trump and so far that's all he's offering.

Okay. That's my last word on the subject. Have at it.

:cheers:
 
Okay. That's my last word on the subject. Have at it.

:cheers:

Liar!!  it's like driving by a car wreck.....you gotta look!!    ;D
 
FJAG said:
So (with due respect to others who might differ) Trump voters aren't "complete idiots" but one has to question their ability to analyse issues and evaluate them rationally. One may be tempted to take God on faith but it would be suicide to do the same with Trump and so far that's all he's offering.

Much like the Democrats and Clinton. She is just, if not more, scarier than Trump. She has offered nothing
than she's always done, no matter what she says. She promised the world to the middle class as a senator and has yet to deliver on any of her promises. She doesn't care about honesty or the people. Trump, generally, cares for the people he speaks to. Clinton(s) are for themselves and how much they can suck out of the US of A for their foundation. Along with her buddy, supporter and banker George Soros.

It still amazes me how people can give the Democrats and Clinton a free ride. They're worried about the US going up in flames if Trump gets elected, but not a word about that madwoman Clinton who could turn the place into a total conflagration.

As such, I too am out of here.
 
Back
Top