Jump to content

US Politics: Redefining National Security


Lany Freelove Cassandra

Recommended Posts

Just now, Dr. Pepper said:

I have to wonder if there will come a point when the Altherions of the country will stop trying so hard to twist things up in order to attempt to justify the Trump admin.  

That would require them to admit when they had been in error, and that will not happen until much, much later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, mormont said:

If it was done on purpose, it was for a wholly different reason: it's because Bannon and Trump want a fight with the courts and the press. I can completely believe that as a motive.

Actually, I can too.  I think that is exactly what is happening.  I fear we are headed to a Civil War era Constitutional Crisis.  If the Judicial Branch tells the Executive Branch to cease and desist, and the Executive Branch says "f$ck you", then what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Trump and Bannon planned this, down to the details of denying lawyers and medications to lawful residents, then they are even more vicious than their worst opponents claim they are. There's some room to argue on if this policy is moral or wise, etc. But the administration?

A Clarifying Moment in American History
There should be nothing surprising about what Donald Trump has done in his first week—but he has underestimated the resilience of Americans and their institutions.


ELIOT A. COHEN 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/a-clarifying-moment-in-american-history/514868/

 

Giuliani Says Travel Ban Was Legal Way to Enact Trump’s Muslim Ban

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/giuliani-says-trump-order-was-legal-way-to-enact-muslim-ban.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Actually, I can too.  I think that is exactly what is happening.  I fear we are headed to a Civil War era Constitutional Crisis.  If the Judicial Branch tells the Executive Branch to cease and desist, and the Executive Branch says "f$ck you", then what?

I thought it would last night.  Trump blinked.  If he keeps blinking he looks weak.  It will come to a head.  When, we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted,” the senators said in a statement. “This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country.” They added that they fear the order will be a “sefl-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism,” and said green-card holders should not be prevented from returning to the U.S.

McCain, Graham Condemn Trump’s Executive Order: ‘Not Properly Vetted’

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/29/mccain-graham-condemn-trump-s-executive-order-not-properly-vetted.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sToNED_CAT said:

It also makes sense that Bannon is invited - he's defacto Trump's political advisor, he is there to advise on political effects of various NS regulations like currently refugee ban...

It makes sense that Bannon is invited, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are kicked out? I didn't know it was Upside-Down day! Hey everybody, it's Upside-Down day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

It makes sense that Bannon is invited, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are kicked out? I didn't know it was Upside-Down day! Hey everybody, it's Upside-Down day!

And here I thought it was Make Shit Up day.  Is my face red!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

McCain and GRaham can talk all they want. I'll believe them once they actually vote against Trump in some way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

McCain and GRaham can talk all they want. I'll believe them once they actually vote against Trump in some way.

I still recall the new shades of equivocating and pandering he managed in the primary and then in the general, when he supposedly no longer had to worry about an attack from the right. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Khaleesi did nothing wrong said:

Even if they were put bonds China still couldn't "call them in" unless the USA agreed to it. Which, in case of a trade or military conflict between them and China, they obviously wouldn't agree to. 

It is the USA who can use that debt (or defaulting on it, rather) to mess up China, not the other way around. In a borrowing situation, it is the lender who carries the risk... 

Geez,  can someone please explain to me how you quote from a closed thread, where there's no quote button?

I don't understand this post or Isk's before it. If Chinese-American relations ever get that bad, surely the Chinese will just start dumping US bonds on the market. Nobody who owns a bond has to keep it. They, of course, would get badly burned in the transaction, but we're not talking about a normal situation here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Geez,  can someone please explain to me how you quote from a closed thread, where there's no quote button?

I don't understand this post or Isk's before it. If Chinese-American relations ever get that bad, surely the Chinese will just start dumping US bonds on the market. Nobody who owns a bond has to keep it. They, of course, would get badly burned in the transaction, but we're not talking about a normal situation here.

I just use the multiquote function, it seems to save quotes between threads. 

Well yeah, but it would hardly burn the USA more than it would them in such a scenario. It also wouldn't have anything to do with "calling in" the debt, given that the bonds would just shift owners to other entities that wouldn't be able to call them in ahead of time either, unless the USA agreed to it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Could Prez Trumpenstain even run a business?  He claimed he was perfect for the job because he wasn't a politician and that Washington should be run like a business.  I'd say the so far the 'government like a business' idea in action has pretty much flamed out into as you note, chaos.

Oh, I don't know.   I think he's running it exactly like he would run a business....after a hostile takeover.   Open the floodgates and release the deluge of 'reorganization' policy.    Throw every crazy, unvetted, restructuring noodle you have at the wall, all at once.

Basically, he's pumping out these certainly controversial, definitely unconstitutional, and probably illegal EOs to not only drop the executive hammer but to tie up everyone's time and resources - remember, the EO for the travel ban is still in effect, and only parts of it have been temporarily stayed.    This was the plan - create chaos and gridlock that will inevitably wind up in litigation for an undetermined period of time - months, years.   Meanwhile, his orders will stand legally (albeit with some back and forth with stays and C&Ds that will be challenged by every lawyer on every side) for the most part, and Trump gets to merrily conduct other shady shit (like the Bannon thing and these freewheeling phone calls with Putin) that leads to further dangerous policy decrees that will meet legal resistance, on and on ad infinitum.   He knows that, too - it's a classic corporate strategy, to do what you want and keep doing it until the courts sort it out.   Stall in litigation forever while you keep operating.

All the players that have actual teeth to take bites of these crises will be so busy dealing with the ever-growing mountain of  garbage from the Trump Dumpster, they'll let some things slip through - and these are the real things to watch.   The stuff that quietly happens in the dead of night while all attention is focused elsewhere, that's the main agenda.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Geez,  can someone please explain to me how you quote from a closed thread, where there's no quote button?

I don't understand this post or Isk's before it. If Chinese-American relations ever get that bad, surely the Chinese will just start dumping US bonds on the market. Nobody who owns a bond has to keep it. They, of course, would get badly burned in the transaction, but we're not talking about a normal situation here.

When China buys a US bond for say 100 dollars, there is the expectation at a future date to get that money plus interest back. If China dumps a lot of bonds on the market, the price of the bonds, the face value plus the interest, will also drop. What this does then hurts the US, because rather than buy new bonds from the US, people can buy discounted bonds from China, for a better price. The US then has to up the interest rate on any new bonds it hopes to sell in order to stay competitive. If China drops enough US bonds on the market,  the ability of the US to actually raise money at a reasonable cost then becomes severely constrained. Trump then does to the US what he has already done 4 times to himself. Not be able to pay his bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Arakan said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/29/merkel-explains-geneva-refugee-convention-to-trump-in-phone-call?CMP=fb_gu

 

You gotta love Mrs Merkel :). In contrast to other European leaders she still has a backbone. Proud of my chancellor in those times. 

She doesn't even know what geneva convention says. All countries have no obligation to take in refugees. The first safe country does. That means for example, in case of Europe, vast majority of them should have been granted asylum in Turkey. Instead Merkel invited them all to Germany. She will lose election, and destroy CDU in process, because of that.

2 hours ago, Relic said:

I want to address these false statements ive been reading here and other places online which claim that "Europe is over run". As an American who has been traveling around Europe for the last 15 months or so I have seen ZERO proof of such. Zero. In fact I haven't as much as seen a single crime occurring, nor have seen as much as two people yell at one another on the street (aside from the one time a crazy drunken police officer slammed his car into about 50 other parked cars in Prague, which i witnessed with my own two eyes). I have been to the UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Czech Republic, Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Romania, Italy, Croatia, Montenegro, Hungary, and Bosnia ...all without seeing one single bit of evidence which collaborates these idiotic Foxnews-like assertions of doom and gloom in Europe.

Yes, the economy isn't where people want it to be, and yes we have seen a handful of cowardly and utterly reprehensible acts of murder on television, but the claim that Europe is somehow over run by hordes of barbarians is preposterous. Life here is light years better than in the States. 

Enjoy your travel. The demographics of Europe has been altered, perhaps irreversibly. And EU has no desire to defend itself. The result are not apparent immediately, but given the current demographic composition of younger generations, politically relevant radical islam will become fact of European life in 2 decades. Not terrorism, that will become fact of life much sooner, I'm talking about political parties freely advocating intolerance much worse than Wilders, Le Pen or other examples of "far right".

2 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

So this whole immigration ban fiasco came about because the current Administration how no idea how to , well, administer. The green card stuff, I heard they already overturned it, although that was just Reince on the Sunday talk shows. Basically the clowns in charge have no idea how to change decree into policy, so a lot of half assed measures, chaos and enormous latitude to people on the ground to interpret it any way they see fit.

There will always be problems with implementation of every executive order. This affected so many people, that it would be impossible to not find adversely affected individuals, especially if media decide to start digging.

49 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

McCain and Graham are globalists. They care only about bombing other countries and keeping international alliances to do just that. Everything else is secondary priority for them.

Also, there seems to be a lot of talk about how this will affect relations between US and muslim countries. I think once people adapt, they will stop caring. Look at Japan for example, they accepted like 100 refugees per year while in US  tens of thousands. Does anyone really care that Japan is so isolationist? No one. Why? Because Japan being nationalist is a historically established fact, so even Merkel doesn't lecture them... In few years it will simply become accepted, that US bans people from some unsafe countries, no one will care either.

And european countries will likely follow the suit anyway. Like I said before - US is ideological leader of Western civilisation. Other countries often follow the example. So refugee and immigration bans just became more acceptable in western world, and that's the thing that pleases me most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...