Has America Gone Rogue?
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Read this article and think is grade A crap! Less on facts and more on ax grinding....a few excerpts below.
Indeed, there is ample reason to suspect that Trump and those to whom he looks for advice would actually welcome a war against Iran.
Based on what concrete evidence? Actually it appears that Trump is interested in countries actually adhering to treaty codicils instead of cheating. I'm okay with that. Had the ex-rodent in chief been more worried about truth and treaty adherence and less about the world loving his sorry Kenyan ass, this wouldn't even be an issue.
How will this decision effect the other signatories of the JCPOA? If the Russians and Chinese are smart, they will stick to the terms of the agreement, demonstrating the maturity and consistency that are marks of a mature power. In other words, by doing nothing, they can win big points at Washington’s expense.
Say what Willis? China and Russia are "mature powers?" Based on what....human rights, their own fair dealings..... Their only motivation would be to garner some type of financial gain to stay in the JCPOA.
By and large, I dislike Munich analogies. But in this instance the comparison may have some merit. In 1938, faced with a megalomaniac in charge of a fearsome military machine and surrounded by a coterie of fanatic militarists, the European democracies wilted, paving away for a great disaster. Today another megalomaniac with a fearsome military machine at his command and responding to the counsel of the latter day equivalent of Goering and Goebbels is on a tear. History will not treat European leaders kindly if they repeat the mistakes of Neville Chamberlain and Eduard Daladier. As an American, I believe that Trump needs to be confronted, not indulged.
Later day equivalents of Goering and Goebbels....wtf? Who would he be referring to? Glad he, as an American, feels like Trump needs to be confronted. Yes he is a West Point grad, he has fought in wars, even lost a son in Iraq, but does that make him the expert, especially in assigning labels to advisors and cabinet members. Just the inference of Munich means he is thinking in terms of Trump is Hitler vs the rest of the peace loving world.
What about had the British, French and Belgians had confronted Hitler/Germany right after the re-occupation of the Rhineland in March of 1935. It is a fact they had more weapons, more personnel and could have easily stopped if not crushed Germany then and there. Trump strikes me here as someone who is not even going to have to worry about appeasement, because sanctions will cripple the regime.
The abandonment of the JCPOA is an act of betrayal with global implications. Who will say nay?
Bad treaties, like bad marriages, need to gotten out of. How can anyone say it is an "act of betrayal" when the primary player is cheating, is the top state sponsor of terrorism and themselves been instruments that have created unstable countries (Lebanon being one).
Indeed, there is ample reason to suspect that Trump and those to whom he looks for advice would actually welcome a war against Iran.
Based on what concrete evidence? Actually it appears that Trump is interested in countries actually adhering to treaty codicils instead of cheating. I'm okay with that. Had the ex-rodent in chief been more worried about truth and treaty adherence and less about the world loving his sorry Kenyan ass, this wouldn't even be an issue.
How will this decision effect the other signatories of the JCPOA? If the Russians and Chinese are smart, they will stick to the terms of the agreement, demonstrating the maturity and consistency that are marks of a mature power. In other words, by doing nothing, they can win big points at Washington’s expense.
Say what Willis? China and Russia are "mature powers?" Based on what....human rights, their own fair dealings..... Their only motivation would be to garner some type of financial gain to stay in the JCPOA.
By and large, I dislike Munich analogies. But in this instance the comparison may have some merit. In 1938, faced with a megalomaniac in charge of a fearsome military machine and surrounded by a coterie of fanatic militarists, the European democracies wilted, paving away for a great disaster. Today another megalomaniac with a fearsome military machine at his command and responding to the counsel of the latter day equivalent of Goering and Goebbels is on a tear. History will not treat European leaders kindly if they repeat the mistakes of Neville Chamberlain and Eduard Daladier. As an American, I believe that Trump needs to be confronted, not indulged.
Later day equivalents of Goering and Goebbels....wtf? Who would he be referring to? Glad he, as an American, feels like Trump needs to be confronted. Yes he is a West Point grad, he has fought in wars, even lost a son in Iraq, but does that make him the expert, especially in assigning labels to advisors and cabinet members. Just the inference of Munich means he is thinking in terms of Trump is Hitler vs the rest of the peace loving world.
What about had the British, French and Belgians had confronted Hitler/Germany right after the re-occupation of the Rhineland in March of 1935. It is a fact they had more weapons, more personnel and could have easily stopped if not crushed Germany then and there. Trump strikes me here as someone who is not even going to have to worry about appeasement, because sanctions will cripple the regime.
The abandonment of the JCPOA is an act of betrayal with global implications. Who will say nay?
Bad treaties, like bad marriages, need to gotten out of. How can anyone say it is an "act of betrayal" when the primary player is cheating, is the top state sponsor of terrorism and themselves been instruments that have created unstable countries (Lebanon being one).
Hell, it wasn't a treaty. More aptly described as a "wink and a nod".
The reason the Euros want to stay in has less to do with nukes and more for the money their corporations stand to receive.
The reason the Euros want to stay in has less to do with nukes and more for the money their corporations stand to receive.
Rumors are swirling that Iran is threatening pols in Europe and America that if they don't get America "under control," they'll start exposing the people they paid off to get the deal done.
Been reading much of the same
I hope they do. Give $150 billion to a regime that wants to wipe us and Israel off the face of the planet, funds terrorism all over the world and suppresses its own citizens while growing their military? People had to be paid off or they're extremely ignorant.
Just think what $150 billion could have done for education. (Even though they wouldn't have gotten it right). It's ok, though, the first African American and "my team" president gets a pass.
Be funny as all get out if Obama, Hillary, and Kerry all took bribes. Bet we still would have investigation of Russian collusion by Trump and the media would not even disclose it.
Good response to the article. I would add one question. Where in the world is the US threatening reoccupation? Iran? NK? These don’t come close to being similar to Germany circa 1938. I would like to know how people keep comparing the US to Germany. I just can’t see the similarities. Beyond a more nationalistic fervor they don’t compare.
While I disagree with the author of the article on most of his points, I tend to approach things from a different perspective.
I find it fascinating that he sees a new alliance forming in the Middle East, with the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel combining forces, leaving our standard allies, France, Germany and the UK out in the cold. I hadn’t seen that opinion before. What would it bode for the future?
We have been allied with the Western European nations for decades now. What would it mean for us to turn our backs on them at this juncture?
I realize the author is American, but what are the odds his attitude is the one our European allies will have? If they, too, feel they need to confront the US, what form might that take?
I found the article to be intriguing.
Maybe France, UK, and Germany is leaving us in the cold. Do they pay their fair share in to the UN? They are becoming less capitalistic and much more socialist. When I went to Belgium a few years ago for an event my company was putting on, the UK, Italians. French, Germans, English, and Belgiums all said we are being taxed to death and do not become like us that seems to be what your government wants. save yourself before you become like us. I kid you not, these are people with some means in Europe and they got angry with me when I said how bad it was in the US and these are people that do business in the US and travel to the US regularly, they said you have no idea how bad it had become, our recession to them was nothing. I was shocked on how down they are on their countries.
We should lead and do what is best for the US, they can choose to take whatever path they want, these are countries free to do what they want. If the US does extremely well economically the rest falls in place, that will allow a strong military as well. Tired of Europe thinking the US will pay for their security and protect them no matter what.
I don’t disagree with anything you wrote. I just find it interesting to witness a changing of the international political landscape; if, indeed, that is what is happening. I do think Israel will stick with the US to the bitter end. Saudi Arabia? Huge question mark.
I will give an example. Mr. Nick Cornellissens who lives in Antwerp helped us run our only sub in Belgium part time.
He said the company he works for never hires for a new position because the taxes are so high to pay for all the social benefits, it is hard to fire because of the liability it creates. He said you only replace when someone leaves. We eventually closed down our Belgium sub for several reasone but it was expensive to run.
We also ran a sub in Germany for awhile. I will say the German and Italian (our German sub did business in Italy) accountants charge out the @zz, are constantly on vacation, and work at their own pace. It is unfortunate but most Germans I have worked with think they are smarter then everyone. There is still suspicion in Europe with the Germans over WW2.
Having international operations slowed our Audit and issuing our Consolidated Audited Financial Statements by 6-7 months because of how slow they operate. I work a lot with KPMG for our tax work and I pulled them in to help and they could not help speed things up.
We shut down our 2 foreign subs for many reasons and finding ways to contract things out, which is what I recommeded to our Board to begin with.
He said the company he works for never hires for a new position because the taxes are so high to pay for all the social benefits, it is hard to fire because of the liability it creates. He said you only replace when someone leaves. We eventually closed down our Belgium sub for several reasone but it was expensive to run.
We also ran a sub in Germany for awhile. I will say the German and Italian (our German sub did business in Italy) accountants charge out the @zz, are constantly on vacation, and work at their own pace. It is unfortunate but most Germans I have worked with think they are smarter then everyone. There is still suspicion in Europe with the Germans over WW2.
Having international operations slowed our Audit and issuing our Consolidated Audited Financial Statements by 6-7 months because of how slow they operate. I work a lot with KPMG for our tax work and I pulled them in to help and they could not help speed things up.
We shut down our 2 foreign subs for many reasons and finding ways to contract things out, which is what I recommeded to our Board to begin with.
Ponca, read “Treacherous Alliance” and you’ll see that a US, Saudi and Israel alliance isn’t far fetched.
The book does a great detailing of the alliance between Iran and Israel through Turkey.
IMHO the biggest threat to world peace right now is Iran. It makes more sense that the players in the region and the US see that through the proper prism and not rose colored glasses. I’d also argue that Western Europe, by settling and being satisfied with a defective agreement, are doing exactly what they did in the 30’s. They waited until Germany’s expansion/aggression was a paramount threat, instead of being proactive and doing something when Germany could have easily been stopped.
The book does a great detailing of the alliance between Iran and Israel through Turkey.
IMHO the biggest threat to world peace right now is Iran. It makes more sense that the players in the region and the US see that through the proper prism and not rose colored glasses. I’d also argue that Western Europe, by settling and being satisfied with a defective agreement, are doing exactly what they did in the 30’s. They waited until Germany’s expansion/aggression was a paramount threat, instead of being proactive and doing something when Germany could have easily been stopped.
That I’m not citing a source I would consider confirming. But that I am seeing variations of this from a lot of interesting sources. The type that are hit and miss.
basically trying to share an interesting and potentially relevant tidbit without vouching for the sources, and acknowledging there are several such unverified sources.
So why give them this sheen of credibility and reliability by calling the “multi-sourced, but unverified”?
Is it it a “enough people spread the rumor, it gets a feel of truthiness” thing?
Do you call rumors from liberals “multi-sourced, but unverified”? Isn’t tales of longtime Trump ties to the Russian mob “multisourced, but unverified”? Do you give them the same weight?
Police follow-up on rumors or leads all the time, enough so they launched an investigation in to Trump evidently.
No different then the workplace, hear rumors all the time, some are true some are not.
This is a discussion board, not as if we are trying to get a FISA warrant. Most of us are smart enough to know the difference between a rumor and a fact.
No different then the workplace, hear rumors all the time, some are true some are not.
This is a discussion board, not as if we are trying to get a FISA warrant. Most of us are smart enough to know the difference between a rumor and a fact.
Hell, since when are facts required to get a FISA warrant; obviously a rumor, but as the immortal Les Miles said it best, "or so I'm told".
I wou,d expect an intentional double standard like this from you.
Solo...not so much.
I didn’t say don’t discuss rumors.
Just don’t try to gloss them a sheen of credibility because they happen to come from your echo chamber of choice.
Last edited:
You think you get me, but you don’t. This is not a court room and you are sitting in judgment again, you are not in the judges chambers which seems to be your make believe echo chamber of choice, and it does not increase your credibility as you think.
Lighten up a little.
If you want to defend trying to give rank rumors an air of credibility because you want those particular rumors to be believed, no skin off my my nose. Like I said, I expect that from you. I’m still going to call them what they are and point out when other people post such bs. Particularly when it comes from posters I tend to respect for their analytical skills and credibility.
I did not post the rumors that have your panties in a wad, and to say I want those rumors to be believed? Going down a rat hole for your echo chamber, I could careless who believes them. Then you go down the passive aggressive path of “expect that from me”? How about giving posters the benefit of the doubt they can identify rumor from fact without getting snooty about it and realizing this is a discussion board?
Be sure to play both sides of the echo chamber fairly and point out to all the dummies on this board what is rumor and what is fact since you think that is important but still no skin off your nose while labeling people challenging you for limiting what is posted on this site in your fear it may not be properly interpreted.
I guess recruiting rumors are forbidden as well? But I am sure if you “respect” that poster you would discipline them appropriately and those that you think less of who cares because they are deemed not worthy by you because you do not respect them.
Better look in the mirror, skin off your nose. Takes two to tango, and all over your self righteous need to explain to the unwashed what a rumor is and keep Hans from posting in a discussion forum something that he wanted to pass along as a rumor and made it clear it was a rumor.
Oh lord....I’ve told you do what you want.
I’ve told you I will do the same.
I’ve haven’t ever told Solo not to post anything.
And yet you’re the one still yapping....panties all in a big bind.
Sorry to just now be responding. I've been out of pocket.
I don't want to get into a long back and forth on this, so hopefully this answer will suffice.
I chose my language very carefully with "multi-sourced, but unverified" specifically with you @CowboyJD in mind, because I wanted to convey that I had seen some interesting smoke from several (multi) sources, but considered the information "Unverified."
I was not trying to ADD credibility to it with that language. I was specifically and directly trying to temper any credibility it might otherwise receive because I did not consider it a fully credible story at this time - simply interesting.
I guess it is my choice of wording that has caused the problem and that's extremely ironic, as I chose that wording specifically to call this what it is - an interesting but unverified rumor coming from multiple sources. i didn't argue that point and in fact simply agreed that is what it is when asked.
it seems pretty clear to me, but one more time - my language was not designed to artificially give credibility, but rather to suppress the credibility I considered it to lack at this point.
In the twittersphere if one is successful they discern who to follow slowly and over time.
Credibility can be built through numbers and momentum of the variations of sources and theme, which is what Han alluded to.
I don't understand why anybody is torqued about how he chose to describe the info to be honest.
If you've spent much time on twitter and applied a systemic approach to information consumption, then you have an idea of what I'm describing and why he used the thre characterization that he did. But you felt the need to do a take down, so I assume you haven't gone through that due diligence.
Credibility can be built by the number of partisan sources repeating the same thing or variations thereof?
An interesting notion that I don’t believe to be true.
I’m not in any way torqued about it, though.
People like us wake up a quarter torqued in the morning and spend the rest of the day somewhere on the torqued spectrum.
Partisan =/= Unreliable =/= Inaccurate....but that is an aside observation.
I don't see any proclamation or labeling of partisan by anybody other than you, but I may have missed that.
Your characterization of what I was attempting to communicate is inaccurate and insufficient (which can be convenient for you in this case).
"Been reading much of the same" is far, far away from being a concrete thrust asserting "This is reality" or even "This is likely reality."
The statement "multisourced but unverified" is a strictly specific and accurate description. You defined for yourself the degree of sheen he lended the original statement.
If your desire is to stifle conversation, in this instance you are doing a bang up job.
If you desire to rely on someone to 100% of the time consume and communicate any observation pertinent to this board to the standards you personally hold, you're doomed.
If you desire to be your brother's keeper, keeping Han on the straight and narrow of what is reality, then you must acknowledge for yourself that i) you don't know the context by which he consumes information, ii) nor the resources invested in performing due diligence on that source or info, and that iii) primary sources to a reality-fact are often not needed to see a picture, trend, or pattern.
Observation and question-forming is where scientific inquiry begins, but the defining step is hypothesis creation and testing. Is see no conclusion proffered by Han, only that he has been "reading much the same."
Anyway, I retract my "torqued" characterization of you, and I apologize for it. You and I just perceive what transpired here differently.
