Mexal Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, Swordfish said: Perhaps the difficulty here is that you do not know the definition of the word cunning: I hope that clarifies things for you. Ok fair enough. He definitely had a cunning plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 16 minutes ago, Mexal said: Ok fair enough. He definitely had a cunning plan. Cunning as a fox that used to be Professor of Cunning at Oxford University but has moved on and is now working for the U.N. at the High Commission of International Cunning Planning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 I heard an interesting question that's worth considering: Would Trump have acted so quickly and forcefully if the President of China wasn't with him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 51 minutes ago, Kalbear said: I suspect he's smart, but he does not think about things or consider them. Again, by his own words he acts on instinct, and he believes that his instincts are very good. He believes he can talk his way out of anything and that nothing will hurt him as long as he continues to be rich. This is why he'll happily reverse his position on things in the space of a conversation, because his goal in the conversation isn't to push a position; it's to please and sell the other person on Trump. I would probably put it this way: he doesn't necessarily make horrible decisions all the time, but he does make incredibly rash, passionate decisions all of the time. Some times they work out, some times they don't, but as he has little ego invested in them it doesn't matter much. He'll just be on to the next one. This worked reasonably well in the campaign (though really do I not want to relitigate that yet again), but it is not a great way to govern unless you are in crisis mode all the time. You realize you just described Cersei Lannister, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Just now, Red Tiger said: You realize you just described Cersei Lannister, right? Nah. Neither in the show or the book. Cersei believes herself to be cunning and does come up with plans. She doesn't react with passion, though she does hold a grudge. She is calculating and ruthless, though she also has very specific ideologies (albeit somewhat selfish ones). Her problem is that she underestimates her opponents and overestimates her own skills. But she plans, calculates, and schemes; Trump doesn't. Trump is far more Robert than Cersei. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: You realize you just described Cersei Lannister, right? Well, Trump's also a badly aging blond who inherited the wealth he thinks he worked hard for. I think the comparison is pretty spot on. ETA: though Kal's point is well-taken. Bobby's impulsiveness certainly also applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 20 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: I heard an interesting question that's worth considering: Would Trump have acted so quickly and forcefully if the President of China wasn't with him? I'm not convinced Putin wasn't also with him . Really hard to say at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Swordfish said: I'm not convinced Putin wasn't also with him . Really hard to say at this point. Hah, I agree. There is a lot of theater going on it looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Mexal said: Hah, I agree. Whoa..... *queue the four horsemen* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, Swordfish said: Whoa..... *queue the four horsemen* To add to this, Russia is now releasing drone footage of the aftermath of the tomahawk strike. If this is true, seems it was a $94 million show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Mexal said: To add to this, Russia is now releasing drone footage of the aftermath of the tomahawk strike. If this is true, seems it was a $94 million show. If that's legit, then it seems safe to assume that missing that many times could not be done accidentally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Also, Russia releasing that shows once again that their primary goals were not to specifically aid Trump but to simply diminish the US in the world's eyes. And shooting the same spot 58 times does seem to be pretty incompetent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, Swordfish said: If that's legit, then it seems safe to assume that missing that many times could not be done accidentally. Agreed. And given there was word of Syrian planes taking off today from those runways, it probably is legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Just now, Kalbear said: Also, Russia releasing that shows once again that their primary goals were not to specifically aid Trump but to simply diminish the US in the world's eyes. And shooting the same spot 58 times does seem to be pretty incompetent. Our military isn't that incompetent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Just now, Mexal said: Our military isn't that incompetent. It's not about the military necessarily - it's about US power. If US power is simply shooting ineffectively at supposed enemies, that's not a great scene. Regardless of that, the Syrians being able to resume airstrikes from that base the very next day points out how completely ineffective that policy was. For the cost of those missiles, the US could have housed and fed thousands of refugees for a couple years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 34 minutes ago, Swordfish said: I'm not convinced Putin wasn't also with him . Really hard to say at this point. I wouldn't be so dismissive, and actually, if it did play a role it would be a savvy play. One of the biggest issues being discussed between the two of them is North Korea and this sends the message that Trump is willing to take military action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said: I wouldn't be so dismissive, and actually, if it did play a role it would be a savvy play. One of the biggest issues being discussed between the two of them is North Korea and this sends the message that Trump is willing to take military action. I'm not being dismissive at all. It seems entirely possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 24 minutes ago, Swordfish said: I'm not being dismissive at all. It seems entirely possible. Oh never mind then. I thought you were being sarcastic. Also, here's an interesting article on the legality of the strikes: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/military-force-presidential-power.html?_r=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 29 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Oh never mind then. I thought you were being sarcastic. No. Not at all....... Quote Also, here's an interesting article on the legality of the strikes: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/military-force-presidential-power.html?_r=0 I don't think there's much of a case to be made about the legality of it. That horse if far afield from the barn at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 In non Syrian news, as a follow up to yesterdays discussion about NAU, check out this disaster: Quote *PROTEST AGAINST NAU ADMINISTRATION AND PRESIDENT CHENG* There have been too many micro aggressions,and bigoted actions that's have taken place on campus and on social media that had threatened the safety and lively hood of our current student population and administration has done nothing about it. We will protest today at 11:15am, starting at the statue on the right side of the Düb, opposite of the McConell side, south quad in front of the nursing building to demand that administration sets in place a clear, concise set of consequences for when these things happen. Step 1 of this process will be a silent walk through campus, with posters of pictures of the unacceptable incidents NAU has let slip by. Posters will be provided. Please show solidarity by showing up wearing all black **NO CLUB AFFILIATED GEAR** This is a student issue and we'd appreciate the support*Pass it on!* #NAUBlackOut I find this message to be a microagression against the English language, and I'm about as sloppy a typist as you'll run across. Perhaps these students should spend more time in writing and communications classes, and less time micro-protesting. https://www.facebook.com/NAUstudentactioncoalition/posts/199002160593062 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.