Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
President 'The Donald' Trump and Surprising Consequences - Mod warning in OP
Options
Comments
-
This post had been deleted.
I would have thought someone who 'don't capitalise the "C"' would also have irrigated a sentence like 'And so am I' from deep up their grammar. Never mind..do as I say etc...
I don't think a man who epouses sectarian, bigoted, racist, mysoginist policies should be in a position of power in any government. A don't think a man who wants to destroy the State he has power over should be in power also.
He is a crazy man and a liar who wants to fight a Christian war with Muslims. He is backed by Christian Statists who believe the world was created in 7 days, and climate change doesnt exist. He admires people like mass murderer Vladimir Putin, crackpop 'philosopher' Alexandr Dugin and probbaly has based his media manipulation on another Russian architect of Authoritarianism Vladislav Surkov as well as (as he admits) Hitlers propagandist.
A nutcase who aims to destroy our civilisation just in order to replace liberalism with his crackpot -ism.0 -
You really can't figure out how the slogan "He will not divide us" might be relevant in the days following an executive order targetting large groups of people based on their country of birth and religion? Oh dear. :rolleyes:
Yes I cannot. He is doing what he was elected to do.
As I said elections by their very nature are divisive.
It seems for a lot of people there is only one way to do things and any other method is wrong.
Also people seem happier with covert behind the scenes methods rather then an upfront and clear approach.
From what I I have seen on the internet that the vocal on the net only respect American democracy when people vote the way they think.
The real irony is that the phrase unamerican has been used to describe trump.
People who say that do not seem to know the origin of this term and how American democracy works.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »Yes I cannot. He is doing what he was elected to do.
As I said elections by their very nature are divisive.
It seems for a lot of people there is only one way to do things and any other method is wrong.
Also people seem happier with covert behind the scenes methods rather then an upfront and clear approach.
From what I I have seen on the internet that the vocal on the net only respect American democracy when people vote the way they think.
The real irony is that the phrase unamerican has been used to describe trump.
People who say that do not seem to know the origin of this term and how American democracy works.
He instructed the border guards and US marshalls to ignore legal court orders at airports. That is not how American democracy works. That is how authoritanarianism works.0 -
Far Right lunatic, seemingly wants everyone to die, which is a rather likely thing to happen, in a war with China. The complete insanity of the Trump administrations is becoming clearer and clearer every day.
So people believe Trump and the Pentagon should drop the policy of the Obama administration where they send navy ships by the islands that China are developing for military purposes in international waters?0 -
And the Obama stance on Taiwan... oh wait.
And the Obama stance on trade and currency with China... oh wait.
And the constant Obama Twitter rants about China... oh wait.
Jan 27th - http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2065799/china-steps-preparedness-possible-military-conflict-usSouth China Morning post wrote:“‘A war within [Trump's] term’ or ‘war breaking out tonight’ are not just slogans, they are becoming a practical reality,” [the Chinese Liberation Army statement] said.
...
Foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying responded by telling the US “to be cautious in what it says and does, so as to avoid harming the peace and stability in the region.”
The Chinese military is constantly prepared for possible military conflict whoever serves as US president, but Donald Trump’s possible “extreme approach” against China was dangerous, according to analysts.
Ian Storey, a senior fellow at ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, said some of the comments from Trump’s key advisors and appointees suggest that the US may pursue a more hardline policy against Beijing in the South China Sea over the next four years
“As it’s highly unlikely that China will compromise its sovereignty claims in the face of US pressure, we can be sure that the dispute will increasingly become a risky point of contention between Beijing and Washington,” he said.0 -
Advertisement
-
He instructed the border guards and US marshalls to ignore legal court orders at airports. That is not how American democracy works. That is how authoritanarianism works.
He is getting things done at least, and not pussy footing around things to make an egg you have to break a few omlettes.
I would not agree with every thing he does but the american people voted for him.
I doubt everything Obama's administration did was above board he was more covert.
Again the american people voted for this THAT is american democracy.
I cannot remember as many people whinging on the internet/worldwide when Barrack was elected
Were pro-life people up in arms for instance?
No they just waited for their chance to vote Trump in
America elected Trump overwhelmingly in the colleigiate system he is now entitled to do as he sees fit for America's interests.
Not Ireland's interests not Syria's interests America's because that is what the people wanted.
If America wants something else they should change their electoral system and or get a stronger third party.
Democracy is only democracy for some when the person they like wins.
Edit no pun intended on the pussy footing by the way.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »He is getting things done at least, and not pussy footing around things to make an egg you have to break a few omlettes.
I would not agree with every thing he does but the american people voted for him.
I doubt everything Obama's administration did was above board he was more covert.
Again the american people voted for this THAT is american democracy.
I cannot remember as many people whinging on the internet/worldwide when Barrack was elected
Were pro-life people up in arms for instance?
No they just waited for their chance to vote Trump in
America elected Trump overwhelmingly in the colleigiate system he is now entitled to do as he sees fit for America's interests.
Not Ireland's interests not Syria's interests America's because that is what the people wanted.
If America wants something else they should change their electoral system and or get a stronger third party.
Democracy is only democracy for some when the person they like wins.
Edit no pun intended on the pussy footing by the way.
I would wager if it was a black President things would be much quieter .No one ever calls a black person racist .
Trump phobia .0 -
So people believe Trump and the Pentagon should drop the policy of the Obama administration where they send navy ships by the islands that China are developing for military purposes in international waters?
No one from the Obama admin, was calling for war. Pretty big difference between the 2 positions.
Its still pretty funny, that people are trying to excuse Trumps far more extreme positions by banging on about what Obama did, very often mis-represeting what was done, all the while.0 -
Manic Moran wrote: »As you can imagine, the analysts were on the radio immediately afterwards (I was in the car). The gist of it was that Trump picked probably the least controversial judge on his list, and most likely to get confirmed. Nobody expected Trump to appoint a Democrat, but as conservative judges go, this one is pretty mainstream. His background is fairly unimpeachable graduating with honors from Harvard and being a Marshall Scholar at Oxford.
Of interest, he clerked for White (a Democrat) and current swing vote justice Kennedy. It is normal for a Judge to take some leads from those they clerk for, so I would expect him to be a little less hard-line than Scalia was.
NPR is considered to be reasonably neutral, right? http://www.npr.org/2017/01/31/511850519/who-is-neil-gorsuch-trumps-first-pick-for-the-supreme-court
"Only weeks after his nomination in 2006, the Senate confirmed him by voice vote. The American Bar Association rated him as "unanimously well qualified" at the time.
Gorsuch has a sterling legal pedigree. He clerked for two Supreme Court justices, Byron White and Anthony Kennedy. He also served as a clerk on the second most important appeals court in the country, in Washington D.C., for conservative Judge David Sentelle.
Like Justice Antonin Scalia, whom he is in line to replace, Gorsuch has cultivated a reputation as a memorable and clear author of legal opinions. He also considers himself to be an originalist. Lawyers who practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, where Gorsuch currently works, said he is a popular and approachable judge."
So, conservative, yes. Someone the Democrats should fight tooth and nail over? I think it could have been much worse for them.
I agree, from reading around it seems like Gorsuch is a slightly-less conservative Scalia. Given Trump appointed the pick it could've been a lot, lot worse.
That said, I fully support and condone Democrats who will give Gorsuch the same courtesy Republicans gave to Merrick Garland.0 -
Did you have the internet in January 2009? The backlash was almighty, not as big as Trump's sure, but then again Obama didn't run on a campaign of negativity, divisiveness and hatred so that's kind of to be expected.gormdubhgorm wrote: »I cannot remember as many people whinging on the internet/worldwide when Barrack was elected
Were pro-life people up in arms for instance?
No they just waited for their chance to vote Trump in
He did win overwhelmingly in the EC system, hence he is president. He also lost by about 3mn votes in the popular vote, hence the protests and record setting disapproval ratings. There's really not much to explain here, and the right to protest is a central part of democracy expressly protected in the US constitution. The US is also the most influential country in the world, and so of course other nations will have an opinion on politics there, to claim otherwise makes no sense, and they have every right to express those opinions. If you don't like that, then don't pay attention to it - which is also your right.America elected Trump overwhelmingly in the colleigiate system he is now entitled to do as he sees fit for America's interests.
Not Ireland's interests not Syria's interests America's because that is what the people wanted.0 -
Advertisement
-
And the Obama stance on Taiwan... oh wait.
And the Obama stance on trade and currency with China... oh wait.
And the constant Obama Twitter rants about China... oh wait.
Jan 27th - http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2065799/china-steps-preparedness-possible-military-conflict-us
It has been US policy for a long time that the US will defend countries like Japan and Taiwan from China.
It has been US policy to keep the international water in the Pacific - international.Prime Minister Shinzo Abe intends to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to defend the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa Prefecture when he meets with President Donald Trump this month in Washington.
At a meeting of the Upper House Budget Committee on Jan. 31, Abe stressed the importance of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, which obliges the United States to defend Japan.
“Article 5 of the security treaty is critical to Japan,” Abe said of the clause that defines situations in which the United States must come to Japan’s defense. “The basic approach to address an emergency together remains the same, with U.S. forces coming to the rescue of Japan.”
The Japan-administered group of islets in the East China Sea has become a potential hot spot because China, which also claims sovereignty over the islands, is increasingly pursuing maritime expansion.
Abe was replying to a question posed by Kanae Yamamoto, a lawmaker of Komeito, the junior coalition partner of Abe’s Liberal Democratic Party.
“The bilateral pact will be workable only when mutual trust is secured, and the summit can be turned into a venue to showcase to the world the countries’ commitment to each other,” Abe said of his meeting with Trump scheduled for Feb. 10.
The treaty’s Article 5 reads: “Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes.”
The prime minister also noted the U.S. role as the sole defender of Japan, touching on the changing security environment in the Asia-Pacific region.
“At a time when Japan cannot defend itself alone, the United States can do it because only Washington, with the world’s largest military capability, can secure its presence in the Asia-Pacific region,” Abe said.
Concerns have arisen in Japan over Trump’s remarks that Japan must do more to defend itself.
Trump’s predecessor, President Barack Obama, made it clear that the Senkaku Islands are covered under the U.S. military’s defense obligations.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201702010024.html
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Paper-7v3.pdfReliance on the United States has been the constant
element of Taiwan’s security strategy. The Taiwan Re-
lations Act provided Taipei confidence in the United
States even after the termination of the U.S.-ROC mu-
tual defense treaty. On the American side of the coin,
concern for Taiwan’s security has lasted through several
administrations due to the political support Taiwan en-
joys in the United States and the knowledge that Asian
allies and partners treat Taiwan as a larger litmus test of
U.S. resolve. Finally, Beijing was long discouraged from
attacking Taiwan because of the risk that capable U.S.
armed forces would intervene to protect Taiwan.0 -
No one from the Obama admin, was calling for war. Pretty big difference between the 2 positions.
Its still pretty funny, that people are trying to excuse Trumps far more extreme positions by banging on about what Obama did, very often mis-represeting what was done, all the while.
And it's getting more hollow and transparent with every single passing day - the 'I'm just afraid the Demcrats want war!!' crowd from the election cycle in particular.0 -
Did you have the internet in January 2009? The backlash was almighty, not as big as Trump's sure, but then again Obama didn't run on a campaign of negativity, divisiveness and hatred so that's kind of to be expected.
Let not forget the 8 year long racist tirade from Trump himself, about Obama not having been born in the US. Amazing how, Trumps racism against Obama is forgotten by his supporters. Its imho some amazing hypocrisy.0 -
Did you have the internet in January 2009? The backlash was almighty, not as big as Trump's sure, but then again Obama didn't run on a campaign of negativity, divisiveness and hatred so that's kind of to be expected.
He did win overwhelmingly in the EC system, hence he is president. He also lost by about 3mn votes in the popular vote, hence the protests and record setting disapproval ratings. There's really not much to explain here, and the right to protest is a central part of democracy expressly protected in the US constitution. The US is also the most influential country in the world, and so of course other nations will have an opinion on politics there, to claim otherwise makes no sense, and they have every right to express those opinions. If you don't like that, then don't pay attention to it - which is also your right.
Obama ran on a campaign of empty words, which helped get Trump elected.
If he had brought real change that one could believe in, then Donald Trump would not be in the Oval Office now.0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »I cannot remember as many people whinging on the internet/worldwide when Barrack was elected
Were pro-life people up in arms for instance?
No they just waited for their chance to vote Trump in
Trash, absolute trash.
Waited for Trump? Nah, they just claimed Obama was an african muslim born in Kenya. Republicans did everything possible to stop Obama. Don't believe me? Here's McConnell, Senate Min. leader at the time outlining Republican's contribution to the political system:
Go do some research before making points which are completely ill-informed.0 -
One China Policy.It has been US policy for a long time that the US will defend countries like Japan and Taiwan from China.
"The United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position."
Next.0 -
Obama ran on a campaign of empty words, which helped get Trump elected.
If he had brought real change that one could believe in, then Donald Trump would not be in the Oval Office now.
Yeah, its not like the Replicans refused to work with him, and did everything in there power to stop him from getting anything done.
Obamas mistake, was not realizing just how far gone the Republicans were.0 -
Obama ran on a campaign of empty words, which helped get Trump elected.
If he had brought real change that one could believe in, then Donald Trump would not be in the Oval Office now.
Tell that to the 13mn+ people put in employment over his presidency, having dug the US out of the biggest recession it had seen in 80 years. As much as it kills you to the point you'll do all you can to deny it and still will be trying to if we find ourselves in a nuclear winter in 3 years time, he improved US global relations considerably after the disaster that was BushCo, and he left office with a higher approval rating than Trump entered with which basically never happens. Had he been able to run for a third term, he'd still be president.
Next.0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »He is getting things done at least, and not pussy footing around things to make an egg you have to break a few omlettes.
I would not agree with every thing he does but the american people voted for him.
I doubt everything Obama's administration did was above board he was more covert.
Again the american people voted for this THAT is american democracy.
I cannot remember as many people whinging on the internet/worldwide when Barrack was elected
Were pro-life people up in arms for instance?
No they just waited for their chance to vote Trump in
America elected Trump overwhelmingly in the colleigiate system he is now entitled to do as he sees fit for America's interests.
Not Ireland's interests not Syria's interests America's because that is what the people wanted.
If America wants something else they should change their electoral system and or get a stronger third party.
Democracy is only democracy for some when the person they like wins.
Edit no pun intended on the pussy footing by the way.
He is entitled to what he sees fit that is legal. He must also respect how the US system works.
Deliberately trying to delegitimise the legal system, instructing border guards and US marshalls to ignore the law is illegal.
Firing an AT for the reason of 'betrayal' shows a dangerous ignorance of that role. Applying to be a candidate for 2020 5 hours after inauguration in orser to silence NGOs, fleece money from people, and further polarise the electorate is good for Trump but bad for the U.S.
When a president refuses to release his tax returns, refuses to divest himself of his businesses, may have debts running into the billions to Chinese and Russians, gives his son in law (debts = 4 bill: Russ + Chin) a job in the administration...then you suspect corruption.
When several of his campaign team are under many investigations about potentially treasonous acts with the Kremlin, when a president abuses his intel agencies rather than admit kremlin involvement in Russian hacking..then you wonder.
Hes had his chance. He needs to be impeached.
BTW There was a vicious campaign of thinly disguised racism against the Obama administration not least by the racist birtherism campaign by Trump.0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »I would not agree with every thing he does but the american people voted for him.
Only a small proportion. About 20% of the eligible electorate actually.gormdubhgorm wrote: »Again the american people voted for this THAT is american democracy.
American democracy is also about the people voicing their opinion when their elected officials screw up.gormdubhgorm wrote: »I cannot remember as many people whinging on the internet/worldwide when Barrack was elected
Were pro-life people up in arms for instance?
You cant? Well they were all out there. Amazingly enough there was even a lunatic movement to try and discredit Obama legitimacy to be president based on where he was born.gormdubhgorm wrote: »America elected Trump overwhelmingly in the colleigiate system he is now entitled to do as he sees fit for America's interests.
Exactly. When you lose the popular vote by three million votes but win the presidency through the electoral college, then it means you're not as popular.gormdubhgorm wrote: »If America wants something else they should change their electoral system and or get a stronger third party.
Agreed. They should.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
One China Policy.
"The United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position."
Next.
While the US is selling military equipment and weapons to Taiwan.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/Despite strong opposition from China, the Obama administration authorized a $1.83 billion weapons sale to Taiwan Wednesday, marking the first U.S. arms shipment to the island in four years.Consisting almost exclusively of defensive weapons, the military package includes two U.S. Navy guided Oliver Hazard Perry class missile frigates, amphibious assault vehicles, and anti-aircraft and anti-ship systems, according to David McKeeby, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs.
"U.S. arms sales to Taiwan are guided by the Taiwan Relations Act and based on an assessment of Taiwan's defense needs," McKeeby said.
"Our longstanding policy on arms sales to Taiwan has been consistent across six different U.S. administrations," he added. "We believe our consistent policy has contributed to the security of Taiwan, and has also supported the maintenance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait."
Taiwan welcomed the announcement of the sale, calling it "a comprehensive display of America's pledge to provide security to Taiwan," according to a statement.
I am not sure if you know the situation with the Holy See/Vatican and relations with China.
Apparently for Chinese relations, a country has to accept the one China policy, and is not allowed to recognise Taiwan.
Next...0 -
Selling the Taiwanese Govt. a bunch of weapons has nothing to do with "defending them", that's just the US Military Industrial Complex in action.While the US is selling military equipment and weapons to Taiwan.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/
I am not sure if you know the situation with the Holy See/Vatican and relations with China.
Apparently for Chinese relations, a country has to accept the one China policy, and is not allowed to recognise Taiwan.
Next...
If they wanted to defend them, they'd actively tell China they recognise their status as an Independent state and if China invaded they'd step in.
If China invaded tomorrow, you really think the US would intervene?0 -
Straw men are straw men and you didn't address a thing.While the US is selling military equipment and weapons to Taiwan.
One China Policy.
"The United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position."
Next.0 -
MightyMandarin wrote: »Selling the Taiwanese Govt. a bunch of weapons has nothing to do with "defending them", that's just the US Military Industrial Complex in action.
If they wanted to defend them, they'd actively tell China they recognise their status as an Independent state and if China invaded they'd step in.
If China invaded tomorrow, you really think the US would intervene?
Nah, I'd personally expect Trump to hold his war with China off until summer 2019 or shortly afterwards to boost his re-election chances.0 -
-
-
MightyMandarin wrote: »Selling the Taiwanese Govt. a bunch of weapons has nothing to do with "defending them", that's just the US Military Industrial Complex in action.
If they wanted to defend them, they'd actively tell China they recognise their status as an Independent state and if China invaded they'd step in.
If China invaded tomorrow, you really think the US would intervene?
The old agreement between the US and China would have materially changed, so the US could take action against what is a China that is becoming a military powerhouse given the expansion their military capabilities are under going.
There could be another situation like the Cuban missile crisis, where the world stands at the edge of an abyss of a nuclear war.
What caused the uproar over Trump accepting a call from the leader of Taiwan is the fact the US do not recognise the country as they want to have full diplomatic relations with China.
I mentioned the Holy See in my previous post as they do not have diplomatic relations with China as they recognise the Republic of China (Taiwan)
If the US really believed in the one China policy, and that Taiwan is a part of China, then why authorise any military equipment sales to Taiwan?
Why go out of your way to piss off China?The U.S. said the deal does not indicate a change in U.S. policy toward China that would alter normalized relations between the two countries.
But the timing of the sale comes amidst heightened tensions between the U.S. and China due to recent Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea.
It also comes after just one-month before elections in Taiwan, where the ruling pro-Beijing party looks unlikely to win, and a historic meeting between the leader of Taiwan and China in November.
Yet some make out Trump has caused these heightened tensions between the US and China...but that is only true for those who make it out to be the case as they failed to analyse that what had been happening under Obama.
But for some they do not like Obama being mentioned.
btw I think China is the aggressor here.0 -
True, though he'd be looking to keep the war effort alive and well through November 2020.
He would certainly try, but I honestly don't see anyone winning that conflict.
Honestly, I think we would see Indian and Pakistan get involved as well, and (Pakistan siding with China, and India the US). Pakistan has no second strike capability, so if they even think the Indians are going to nuke them, they will launch a nuclear assault, which could easily lead to all out nuclear war. Basically, we are all dead, with the best case scenario being a quick death.
I have to say that seriously talking about a conflict between China and the US is insane, and show just show uttlerly insane Trump and Bannon are, that this is even a possibility.0 -
Advertisement
-
Did you have the internet in January 2009? The backlash was almighty, not as big as Trump's sure, but then again Obama didn't run on a campaign of negativity, divisiveness and hatred so that's kind of to be expected.
He did win overwhelmingly in the EC system, hence he is president. He also lost by about 3mn votes in the popular vote, hence the protests and record setting disapproval ratings. There's really not much to explain here, and the right to protest is a central part of democracy expressly protected in the US constitution. The US is also the most influential country in the world, and so of course other nations will have an opinion on politics there, to claim otherwise makes no sense, and they have every right to express those opinions. If you don't like that, then don't pay attention to it - which is also your right.
I don't pay attention to the marches/protests I find most if not all of them silly and/or self serving.
Bill Burr has a refreshing take on it:
`
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLBGnialGnA
Note: some the language is un-parliamentary.
As for the popular vote thing that is like complaining about the rules of the game if you lose it.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement