Author Topic: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?  (Read 169222 times)

sol

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4996
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2900 on: April 07, 2017, 08:36:00 AM »
Realistic impacts of Trump's presidency? Well as of this morning, 59 tomahawk missiles...

Like I said yesterday, I'm somewhat heartened that Trump didn't just send a nuclear ICBM.  I take that as a sign that he's finally found some security council advisors who have half a clue.  That's progress!

Tasty Pinecones

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2901 on: April 07, 2017, 08:44:42 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

tarheeldan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2902 on: April 07, 2017, 08:54:08 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Gondolin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2903 on: April 07, 2017, 09:35:40 AM »
Quote
Next they will say that Syria's Assad is using nerve gas on his own people so our military has an excuse to go to war there.

You know this conspiracy has to be already making the rounds. Putin told Assad to use a gas attack and then told Trump to respond with force as a prelude to a major US invasion which will distract from the hacking scandal which threatens to reveal that Putin and Trump are blood brother members of the NWO Satanist government. After that it's all chemtrails, Rothchilds, False flag, weed cures cancer, Flat earth, clonus the part horror, etc.
"There cannot be two skies"

tarheeldan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2904 on: April 07, 2017, 09:45:00 AM »
Don't forget the Illuminati, Free Masons, robots, and aliens!!

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2905 on: April 07, 2017, 09:49:07 AM »
Don't forget the Illuminati, Free Masons, robots, and aliens!!
And the shadow government! Can't forget the shadow government!

iris lily

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2270
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2906 on: April 07, 2017, 09:49:45 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Why do you think Ivanka has moved into the White House? She is tasked with keeping good old Dad away from the red button.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2907 on: April 07, 2017, 09:57:49 AM »
We should also not forget that Neil Gorsuch was confirmed today after the Senate changed the rules for nomination.

From a procedural standpoint, it strikes me as strange that it takes fewer votes to change a rule than a rule that requires a number of votes requires. In other words, if there is a procedural rule requires a 2/3 majority (or whatever), then it should also require that number of votes to change that rule. But, such are the rules of the Senate. Hurrah!

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2908 on: April 07, 2017, 10:20:07 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Why do you think Ivanka has moved into the White House? She is tasked with keeping good old Dad away from the red button.

Except on the Sabbath.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2909 on: April 07, 2017, 10:22:49 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Why do you think Ivanka has moved into the White House? She is tasked with keeping good old Dad away from the red button.

Except on the Sabbath.
? her sabbath is tomorrow.

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2910 on: April 07, 2017, 10:28:04 AM »
Quote
Next they will say that Syria's Assad is using nerve gas on his own people so our military has an excuse to go to war there.

You know this conspiracy has to be already making the rounds. Putin told Assad to use a gas attack and then told Trump to respond with force as a prelude to a major US invasion which will distract from the hacking scandal which threatens to reveal that Putin and Trump are blood brother members of the NWO Satanist government. After that it's all chemtrails, Rothchilds, False flag, weed cures cancer, Flat earth, clonus the part horror, etc.

A lot of ways that could have happened. I really doubt anyone at our bases is altering satellite data or something.

Could be pretty easy for the rebels to fake this. They know Assad is beginning to attack a town. They have a way to know when a plane takes off and when bombs will be dropped. they know the approximate targets. They have nerve gas. They blow it up when the plane drops the bombs....

We get into another quagmire.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2911 on: April 07, 2017, 10:40:54 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Why do you think Ivanka has moved into the White House? She is tasked with keeping good old Dad away from the red button.

Except on the Sabbath.
? her sabbath is tomorrow.

Yeah, so if he does something nutso tomorrow, there's your answer.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2912 on: April 07, 2017, 10:41:34 AM »
Quote
Next they will say that Syria's Assad is using nerve gas on his own people so our military has an excuse to go to war there.

You know this conspiracy has to be already making the rounds. Putin told Assad to use a gas attack and then told Trump to respond with force as a prelude to a major US invasion which will distract from the hacking scandal which threatens to reveal that Putin and Trump are blood brother members of the NWO Satanist government. After that it's all chemtrails, Rothchilds, False flag, weed cures cancer, Flat earth, clonus the part horror, etc.

A lot of ways that could have happened. I really doubt anyone at our bases is altering satellite data or something.

Could be pretty easy for the rebels to fake this. They know Assad is beginning to attack a town. They have a way to know when a plane takes off and when bombs will be dropped. they know the approximate targets. They have nerve gas. They blow it up when the plane drops the bombs....

We get into another quagmire.

... or maybe it is consistent with decades of the Assad family style of rule. Here's an example from Assad's father in 1981: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Hama_massacre

Assad's well-documented use of torture at a scale that is a bit tough to comprehend:
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-prisons-torture-20160817-snap-story.html
https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/12/16/if-dead-could-speak/mass-deaths-and-torture-syrias-detention-facilities

That Assad has used chemcial weapons on his own people just a few years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghouta_chemical_attack

... and that it is highly unlikely that the removal of chemical weapons from Syria in 2014 was complete. Russia has been a long-standing ally of Syria for economic and military interests for a long time and has an obvious motivation (and long track record in many instances) of spreading disinformation, such as that the rebels procured sarin and used it as a false flag op.

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2913 on: April 07, 2017, 10:55:47 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Why do you think Ivanka has moved into the White House? She is tasked with keeping good old Dad away from the red button.

Except on the Sabbath.
? her sabbath is tomorrow.

Yeah, so if he does something nutso tomorrow, there's your answer.
ok. I thought you were implying since the missiles were launched this morning it must have been because she was not there to stop him. Miscommunication.

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2914 on: April 07, 2017, 11:03:42 AM »
Quote
Next they will say that Syria's Assad is using nerve gas on his own people so our military has an excuse to go to war there.

You know this conspiracy has to be already making the rounds. Putin told Assad to use a gas attack and then told Trump to respond with force as a prelude to a major US invasion which will distract from the hacking scandal which threatens to reveal that Putin and Trump are blood brother members of the NWO Satanist government. After that it's all chemtrails, Rothchilds, False flag, weed cures cancer, Flat earth, clonus the part horror, etc.

A lot of ways that could have happened. I really doubt anyone at our bases is altering satellite data or something.

Could be pretty easy for the rebels to fake this. They know Assad is beginning to attack a town. They have a way to know when a plane takes off and when bombs will be dropped. they know the approximate targets. They have nerve gas. They blow it up when the plane drops the bombs....

We get into another quagmire.

... or maybe it is consistent with decades of the Assad family style of rule. Here's an example from Assad's father in 1981: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Hama_massacre

That was his dad. He knows chem/bio weapons are off the table if he wants to keep is position. Granted he is a dictator but just seems dumb, and even in the short term military analysis, dumb

Assad's well-documented use of torture at a scale that is a bit tough to comprehend:
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-prisons-torture-20160817-snap-story.html
https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/12/16/if-dead-could-speak/mass-deaths-and-torture-syrias-detention-facilities

Yes, he is a dictator. that is why they call them dictators.

That Assad has used chemcial weapons on his own people just a few years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghouta_chemical_attack

... and that it is highly unlikely that the removal of chemical weapons from Syria in 2014 was complete. Russia has been a long-standing ally of Syria for economic and military interests for a long time and has an obvious motivation (and long track record in many instances) of spreading disinformation, such as that the rebels procured sarin and used it as a false flag op.

my points are bolded; i hate to overly quote-post.

Either way the cui bono here is for the rebels to have planted this, see; 59 tomahawk missiles.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2915 on: April 07, 2017, 11:57:07 AM »

my points are bolded; i hate to overly quote-post.

Either way the cui bono here is for the rebels to have planted this, see; 59 tomahawk missiles.

But, that the rebels planted this is not actually proven, and appears to be promoted only by Assad, Russia, and some fringe news sources. It is far more probable that Assad assumed that he could get away with it because of Trump's proclaimed realpolitik approach in which he said that we had to just accept that Assad was probably going to remain in power.

Why would Assad do it? For the same reason he (and his father before him) have generally adopted a scorched earth policy: destroy the hope of any who may oppose the regime. A gas attack is terrible and if he assumed that Trump would do nothing, would further the psychological aspects of the war campaign. This is why they bomb aid convoys just as they are arriving, etc, etc, etc.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2916 on: April 07, 2017, 12:43:30 PM »
They were for sure dropping barrel bombs from helicopters at altitude in an urban environment. There's no reason to think they wouldn't use sarin. I haven't spent a ton of time digging through the various claims on the most recent attack, but nothing about it is in any way surprising.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1840
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2917 on: April 07, 2017, 01:48:36 PM »
Plus, isn't the burden of evidence on the "alternate" (to be generous) or conspiratorial theory over the more obvious, simple explanation? Occam's Razor applies. The obvious explanation is the Assad regime used chemical weapons on the populace, with plenty of evidence to support that. I've seen ZERO evidence supporting the alternate claim it was engineered by "the rebels."

Using the "cui bono" ("who benefits" -- I had to look it up) standard might be interesting for us internet sleuths, but it is hardly convincing. That is the exact standard floated by 9/11 conspirators claiming the Israelis or military industrial complex engineered the attacks on New York and D.C. (also with no evidence). This alternate-facts explanation floated by, who guessed it, Russia and Syria, that the Syrian chemical attack was engineered by the regime opposition, smells just like the 9/11 and other ridiculous like-minded conspiracies to me (no horrible pun intended).
"Not all quotes on the internet are accurate" -- Abraham Lincoln

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2918 on: April 07, 2017, 04:16:01 PM »
In other news, the airbase is already operational. Because of course it is.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

sol

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4996
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2919 on: April 07, 2017, 04:20:35 PM »
In other news, the airbase is already operational. Because of course it is.

Wait, you mean we spent a hundred million dollars in cruise missiles to deactivate an airstrip for 14 hours?  That doesn't seem very cost effective...

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2920 on: April 07, 2017, 04:58:56 PM »
In other news, the airbase is already operational. Because of course it is.

Wait, you mean we spent a hundred million dollars in cruise missiles to deactivate an airstrip for 14 hours?  That doesn't seem very cost effective...
Jeez. I wonder if maybe the Russians tipped the Syrians off seeing as how we alerted the Russians an hour before the strikes?

DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1840
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2921 on: April 07, 2017, 05:26:29 PM »
NBC News reports 24 Syrian aircraft were destroyed, plus significant damage to structures. So while the air base may or may not be operational (depending on who we are to believe), destroying 24 aircraft is at least not trivial.
"Not all quotes on the internet are accurate" -- Abraham Lincoln

sol

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4996
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2922 on: April 07, 2017, 06:14:52 PM »
destroying 24 aircraft is at least not trivial.

I hope those 24 aircraft were worth at least four million US dollars each, or else they got the better end of this trade.  Cruise missiles are expensive.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2923 on: April 07, 2017, 06:29:20 PM »
The attack, though mostly symbolic, was a modestly good move by Trump since it backs him out of the non-interventionist corner he painted himself into. He will now be more credible when speaking of red lines. The issues regarding the War Resolution Act of 1973 are irrelevant given the historical precedent of ignoring the letter (if not the spirit) of that legislation.

Abe

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2924 on: April 07, 2017, 09:09:51 PM »
In other news, the airbase is already operational. Because of course it is.

Wait, you mean we spent a hundred million dollars in cruise missiles to deactivate an airstrip for 14 hours?  That doesn't seem very cost effective...

Trump always secures great deals because he speaks his mind and is a successful businessman, etc etc

In college, a history professor of mine who was an officer in the US Air Force was in charge of targeting VC assets. He said to us "We used to ask...if a $80k bomb hits a bamboo bridge, did the bomb destroy the bridge, or did the bridge destroy the bomb?"

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 693
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2925 on: April 08, 2017, 06:34:05 AM »
They've hidden the real launch codes between two books in the Pentagon... Trump only has the Powerball numbers from last year.

LOL! Thank you for that.

Why do you think Ivanka has moved into the White House? She is tasked with keeping good old Dad away from the red button.

Except on the Sabbath.

Anti-Semitic much, or what's your point, then?

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2926 on: April 08, 2017, 07:12:45 AM »
The attack, though mostly symbolic, was a modestly good move by Trump since it backs him out of the non-interventionist corner he painted himself into. He will now be more credible when speaking of red lines. The issues regarding the War Resolution Act of 1973 are irrelevant given the historical precedent of ignoring the letter (if not the spirit) of that legislation.

No, it was a terrible move because it put us in a less secure position in the region. All of the agreements about not shooting down each others' aircraft are out the window. The deescalation hotline is dead. The Russians are putting in more advanced SAM batteries. We didn't even hit the building where they kept the sarin. We didn't disable the runway. It was worse than useless. It was actively bad for American interests in the region. Going forward, we're going to be dealing with a major area-denial situation that previously didn't exist. Good luck trying to keep all those 5th gen stealth fighters on station when the tankers can't get close enough.

It was a fucking stupid move. Although, I can sort of understand it from the DoD's perspective. The "wait for the right opportunity" option was probably off the table per Trump. A Tomahawk strike was probably the least bad option, and looks good on TV.


Except on the Sabbath.

Anti-Semitic much, or what's your point, then?

No, not being anti-Semitic at all. My point was that a lot of the crazier shit he Tweeted during the campaign happened when his daughter was observing the Sabbath. Presumably, she hasn't really been around to manage any of that since the inauguration. Maybe it'll improve now that she's in the White House, except on the Sabbath.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

wenchsenior

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 892
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2927 on: April 08, 2017, 07:30:58 AM »
NBC News reports 24 Syrian aircraft were destroyed, plus significant damage to structures. So while the air base may or may not be operational (depending on who we are to believe), destroying 24 aircraft is at least not trivial.

Unless it was like the Davis-Monthan 'bone yard'.  That would be kind of funny, though.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8226
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2928 on: April 08, 2017, 07:33:27 AM »
destroying 24 aircraft is at least not trivial.

I hope those 24 aircraft were worth at least four million US dollars each, or else they got the better end of this trade.  Cruise missiles are expensive.

Eh.  The US military has never been concerned about cost effectiveness.  Look at the money spent bombing tents and caves in Afghanistan.  You don't get use a 600 billion dollar a year budget and worry about pinching pennies.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2929 on: April 08, 2017, 07:34:19 AM »

No, it was a terrible move because it put us in a less secure position in the region. All of the agreements about not shooting down each others' aircraft are out the window. The deescalation hotline is dead. The Russians are putting in more advanced SAM batteries. We didn't even hit the building where they kept the sarin. We didn't disable the runway. It was worse than useless. It was actively bad for American interests in the region. Going forward, we're going to be dealing with a major area-denial situation that previously didn't exist. Good luck trying to keep all those 5th gen stealth fighters on station when the tankers can't get close enough.

It was a fucking stupid move. Although, I can sort of understand it from the DoD's perspective. The "wait for the right opportunity" option was probably off the table per Trump. A Tomahawk strike was probably the least bad option, and looks good on TV.


So what is the red line for taking action ? 

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2930 on: April 08, 2017, 09:18:24 AM »

No, it was a terrible move because it put us in a less secure position in the region. All of the agreements about not shooting down each others' aircraft are out the window. The deescalation hotline is dead. The Russians are putting in more advanced SAM batteries. We didn't even hit the building where they kept the sarin. We didn't disable the runway. It was worse than useless. It was actively bad for American interests in the region. Going forward, we're going to be dealing with a major area-denial situation that previously didn't exist. Good luck trying to keep all those 5th gen stealth fighters on station when the tankers can't get close enough.

It was a fucking stupid move. Although, I can sort of understand it from the DoD's perspective. The "wait for the right opportunity" option was probably off the table per Trump. A Tomahawk strike was probably the least bad option, and looks good on TV.


So what is the red line for taking action ?

Apparently, it's not use of chemical weapons. Assad did it again yesterday, one day after the bomb strike. Trump is apparently not going to act this time.

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/07/assad-just-responded-trumps-strike-gassing-innocent-civilians/
"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2931 on: April 08, 2017, 11:10:34 AM »

No, it was a terrible move because it put us in a less secure position in the region. All of the agreements about not shooting down each others' aircraft are out the window. The deescalation hotline is dead. The Russians are putting in more advanced SAM batteries. We didn't even hit the building where they kept the sarin. We didn't disable the runway. It was worse than useless. It was actively bad for American interests in the region. Going forward, we're going to be dealing with a major area-denial situation that previously didn't exist. Good luck trying to keep all those 5th gen stealth fighters on station when the tankers can't get close enough.

It was a fucking stupid move. Although, I can sort of understand it from the DoD's perspective. The "wait for the right opportunity" option was probably off the table per Trump. A Tomahawk strike was probably the least bad option, and looks good on TV.


So what is the red line for taking action ?

It's not even about the red lines. Using chemical weapons is horrible and inhumane, but maybe biding our time and waiting for an opportunity for a decisive strike was the better option.

Lobbing Tomahawks was pointless and did nothing but hurt us. If we were going to say "fuck it," and torpedo the tenuous arrangement we had in the region, then at least make it a clean job. A flight of B2s dropping JDAMs would be a better choice for targeting an airfield. They didn't even bother to pretend to hit the runway. If anything, our response makes us look even weaker, and encourages more bad behavior. Now, Assad (and whoever else) can basically work under the assumption that heinous war crimes will be met with token fireworks and plenty of advance notice.

It's fucking amateur hour at the top here. God only knows what the mid-level military folks were thinking when the orders came through. It couldn't have been pleasant.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2932 on: April 08, 2017, 11:39:20 AM »
The attack, though mostly symbolic, was a modestly good move by Trump since it backs him out of the non-interventionist corner he painted himself into. He will now be more credible when speaking of red lines. The issues regarding the War Resolution Act of 1973 are irrelevant given the historical precedent of ignoring the letter (if not the spirit) of that legislation.

No, it was a terrible move because it put us in a less secure position in the region. All of the agreements about not shooting down each others' aircraft are out the window. The deescalation hotline is dead. The Russians are putting in more advanced SAM batteries. We didn't even hit the building where they kept the sarin. We didn't disable the runway. It was worse than useless. It was actively bad for American interests in the region. Going forward, we're going to be dealing with a major area-denial situation that previously didn't exist. Good luck trying to keep all those 5th gen stealth fighters on station when the tankers can't get close enough.

It was a fucking stupid move. Although, I can sort of understand it from the DoD's perspective. The "wait for the right opportunity" option was probably off the table per Trump. A Tomahawk strike was probably the least bad option, and looks good on TV.
The Russians were given advance notice of the attack and Putin embraces realpolitik wholeheartedly so that he knows to ignore this operation (and because we know this about Putin [and he knows that we know], the attack likely calculated all of this in the background; Trump might be a moron but Mattis and McMaster are not).

My point wasn't arguing about the US's (vaguely defined) interests in the area nor was it about the efficacy of this attack; rather, the critical point was to redefine Trump's dovish foreign policy tilt in favor of one where military action is credible. I suspect had Hilary won, al-Assad would not have used chemical weapons (assuming the motivation was to test Trump's resolve rather than an unauthorized use not centrally coordinated by al-Assad) because of Hillary's more hawkish stance.

Secondly, Trump practically had to do something like this after talking about red lines. It may have been a sloppy thoughtless mistake to brashly speak the way he did about the situation in Syria, but once he did, not following through with some action would make Trump appear extremely weak to the detriment of US foreign policy in general.

Which brings me to the last point: one can't take this Syria mission a la carte while ignoring its impact on other US objectives around the world. This attack gives the US more sabre-rattling credibility in "negotiating" other hot-spots, like North Korea.


NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2934 on: April 08, 2017, 12:25:26 PM »
Of course Russia has to say things like that to save face but if you actually read the USNI article with the misleading headline, the US officials all claim the deconfliction network is still in place (further proof of this is that Zero Hedge [lol] picked up the story).

The RT article is about military hardware deployed years ago (does Putin have a DeLorean?).

Perhaps of interest, a NYTimes take on the strike.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2935 on: April 08, 2017, 02:49:08 PM »
Of course Russia has to say things like that to save face but if you actually read the USNI article with the misleading headline, the US officials all claim the deconfliction network is still in place (further proof of this is that Zero Hedge [lol] picked up the story).

The RT article is about military hardware deployed years ago (does Putin have a DeLorean?).

Perhaps of interest, a NYTimes take on the strike.

That article does nothing to make Trump look more credible.

The point remains: the strike was a joke.

The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2936 on: April 08, 2017, 05:59:37 PM »
Of course Russia has to say things like that to save face but if you actually read the USNI article with the misleading headline, the US officials all claim the deconfliction network is still in place (further proof of this is that Zero Hedge [lol] picked up the story).

The RT article is about military hardware deployed years ago (does Putin have a DeLorean?).

Perhaps of interest, a NYTimes take on the strike.

That article does nothing to make Trump look more credible.

The point remains: the strike was a joke.
79 senators disagree, including 30 Democrats so this is Trump's first action to find bipartisan support outside of a couple of his administrative nominees.

And the view from Europe as quoted in the NYTimes article:

After the missile strike, Israeli news outlets were filled with headlines like “The Americans Are Back,” and European leaders expressed relief both that he had taken action and that he had not gone too far.

rocketpj

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2937 on: April 08, 2017, 07:47:36 PM »
I am deeply disturbed by how hard so many politicians and media types are trying to act like this is finally a sign that he is going be a real president.  For a non-complex thinker like Trump, who has an infantile need for approval, that just means he will throw more bombs into hotspots around the world to get another approval fix.

A bunch of bought and paid for senators approving bombing somewhere sounds, to a non-American, like just another weekday in the US. 

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2938 on: April 08, 2017, 10:44:01 PM »
I am deeply disturbed by how hard so many politicians and media types are trying to act like this is finally a sign that he is going be a real president.  For a non-complex thinker like Trump, who has an infantile need for approval, that just means he will throw more bombs into hotspots around the world to get another approval fix.

A bunch of bought and paid for senators approving bombing somewhere sounds, to a non-American, like just another weekday in the US.

I wouldn't say this is a sign he is going to be "real" (whatever that means) but rather one that indicates the less-crazy members in his entourage are winning the battle of influence over Trump's woefully inadequate attention span.

Who "bought and paid for" the senators in a way that's relevant to their opinion on Syria?

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2939 on: April 09, 2017, 11:49:30 AM »
79 senators disagree, including 30 Democrats so this is Trump's first action to find bipartisan support outside of a couple of his administrative nominees.

And the view from Europe as quoted in the NYTimes article:

After the missile strike, Israeli news outlets were filled with headlines like “The Americans Are Back,” and European leaders expressed relief both that he had taken action and that he had not gone too far.

Show me some kind of evidence, or even someone putting forth an argument, that dropping missiles on that airbase accomplished any kind of military goal. Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2940 on: April 09, 2017, 01:01:37 PM »
China's mocking us for the missile strike now, too.

Trump is "a weakened politician who needed to flex his muscles."

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/china-mocks-trump-missile-strike-after-xi-leaves-us-a-weakened-politician-who-needed-to-flex-his-muscles/

"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2941 on: April 09, 2017, 01:34:34 PM »
Long after my mom left (escaped?) the USSR she would read Pravda newspaper because she wanted to remind herself why she left. I'm not sure anyone actually took Pravda seriously (let alone literally!) and Xinhua is probably no different. None of this talk about Syria is about the Syrian actions anyway: China has close to zero strategic interest there. It's about maneuvering for credible leverage in east Asia.

Show me some kind of evidence, or even someone putting forth an argument, that dropping missiles on that airbase accomplished any kind of military goal. Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.
As stated before, there was not a military goal involved in the operation. This was a signal that redefined US foreign policy commitments far beyond Syria. It's ridiculous in a way, yes, but compared to tomahawk missiles, talk is cheap (especially if the talk consists of gold-plated shit, i.e. Trump tweets).

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2942 on: April 09, 2017, 02:24:11 PM »
Long after my mom left (escaped?) the USSR she would read Pravda newspaper because she wanted to remind herself why she left. I'm not sure anyone actually took Pravda seriously (let alone literally!) and Xinhua is probably no different. None of this talk about Syria is about the Syrian actions anyway: China has close to zero strategic interest there. It's about maneuvering for credible leverage in east Asia.

Show me some kind of evidence, or even someone putting forth an argument, that dropping missiles on that airbase accomplished any kind of military goal. Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.
As stated before, there was not a military goal involved in the operation. This was a signal that redefined US foreign policy commitments far beyond Syria. It's ridiculous in a way, yes, but compared to tomahawk missiles, talk is cheap (especially if the talk consists of gold-plated shit, i.e. Trump tweets).

So, you see nothing at all significant in the fact that the state-run news agency of China made a point of saying something so contemptuous and mocking of the US president literally hours after China's leader was here for an official visit?

Personally, I'm damn sick of our leader being a goddamn international embarrassment. He makes us look like fools. And I wouldn't mind so much, except that what the Chinese news agency published is absolutely true.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2017, 02:27:01 PM by Kris »
"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2943 on: April 09, 2017, 07:31:56 PM »
Long after my mom left (escaped?) the USSR she would read Pravda newspaper because she wanted to remind herself why she left. I'm not sure anyone actually took Pravda seriously (let alone literally!) and Xinhua is probably no different. None of this talk about Syria is about the Syrian actions anyway: China has close to zero strategic interest there. It's about maneuvering for credible leverage in east Asia.

Show me some kind of evidence, or even someone putting forth an argument, that dropping missiles on that airbase accomplished any kind of military goal. Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.
As stated before, there was not a military goal involved in the operation. This was a signal that redefined US foreign policy commitments far beyond Syria. It's ridiculous in a way, yes, but compared to tomahawk missiles, talk is cheap (especially if the talk consists of gold-plated shit, i.e. Trump tweets).

So, you see nothing at all significant in the fact that the state-run news agency of China made a point of saying something so contemptuous and mocking of the US president literally hours after China's leader was here for an official visit?

Personally, I'm damn sick of our leader being a goddamn international embarrassment. He makes us look like fools. And I wouldn't mind so much, except that what the Chinese news agency published is absolutely true.
I don't believe that foreign policy should be guided by how it will be described within a Chinese propaganda rag. Does Xi Jinping worry about how he is portrayed in Rush Limbaugh rants?

One has to distinguish between Trump looking the fool and US policy being in error. Trump demonstrates his inadequacy every time he hammers out 140 characters with his tiny hands, but fortunately for us, he hasn't drained the swamp and is up to his double-chin in deep state informing and shaping his actions.

And if your criticism of Trump is to any extent informed by your participation in a rival political tribe, the Syrian intervention is a bit of a victory since it is a drastic departure from a core element of his platform: "America-First" non-interventionism. If you listen very carefully, you can already hear the Claremonsters and other pseudo-intellectual bottom feeders crying out to the gods in confusion. If the world is going to burn, at least we can enjoy it with a side of schadenfreude?

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2944 on: April 10, 2017, 07:22:17 AM »
Long after my mom left (escaped?) the USSR she would read Pravda newspaper because she wanted to remind herself why she left. I'm not sure anyone actually took Pravda seriously (let alone literally!) and Xinhua is probably no different. None of this talk about Syria is about the Syrian actions anyway: China has close to zero strategic interest there. It's about maneuvering for credible leverage in east Asia.

Show me some kind of evidence, or even someone putting forth an argument, that dropping missiles on that airbase accomplished any kind of military goal. Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.
As stated before, there was not a military goal involved in the operation. This was a signal that redefined US foreign policy commitments far beyond Syria. It's ridiculous in a way, yes, but compared to tomahawk missiles, talk is cheap (especially if the talk consists of gold-plated shit, i.e. Trump tweets).

So, you see nothing at all significant in the fact that the state-run news agency of China made a point of saying something so contemptuous and mocking of the US president literally hours after China's leader was here for an official visit?

Personally, I'm damn sick of our leader being a goddamn international embarrassment. He makes us look like fools. And I wouldn't mind so much, except that what the Chinese news agency published is absolutely true.
I don't believe that foreign policy should be guided by how it will be described within a Chinese propaganda rag. Does Xi Jinping worry about how he is portrayed in Rush Limbaugh rants?

One has to distinguish between Trump looking the fool and US policy being in error. Trump demonstrates his inadequacy every time he hammers out 140 characters with his tiny hands, but fortunately for us, he hasn't drained the swamp and is up to his double-chin in deep state informing and shaping his actions.

And if your criticism of Trump is to any extent informed by your participation in a rival political tribe, the Syrian intervention is a bit of a victory since it is a drastic departure from a core element of his platform: "America-First" non-interventionism. If you listen very carefully, you can already hear the Claremonsters and other pseudo-intellectual bottom feeders crying out to the gods in confusion. If the world is going to burn, at least we can enjoy it with a side of schadenfreude?

Psh. It was a publicity stunt. It's wildly exaggerating to call this anything like a "departure" from anything. If you're enjoying this merely because people who piss you off are pissed off by it, then that's your prerogative, I guess.
"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

Gondolin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2945 on: April 10, 2017, 08:56:45 AM »
Quote
Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.

This may offend your keen sense of warrior honor yet, it has been a useful mainstay of political action literally since the day the first sword was forged.

Quote
So, you see nothing at all significant in the fact that the state-run news agency of China made a point of saying something so contemptuous and mocking of the US president literally hours after China's leader was here for an official visit?

Kris, no. It's not significant at all. Sure, Trump is a dangerous embarrassment and mocking him is like shooting fish in a barrel. BUT, Chinese state outlets would be trumpeting this meeting as a victory for Xi no matter who was in the White House. China has significant domestic problems and significant international ambitions which only partly overlap with any US interests. State outlets have a vested duty to help prop up the regime - Jesus Christ could be President and Chinese propaganda outlets would still be barking about how God's Son is spineless coward who can't stand up to a real man like Xi.

The US wields a disproportionate influence in global politics but, not *everything* that other countries do is:
A) related to that country's relationship with the US
B) an accurate reflection of any international relationship

"There cannot be two skies"

former player

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2150
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2946 on: April 10, 2017, 09:15:31 AM »
Quote
Scoring political points by making stuff go boom is fucking stupid.

This may offend your keen sense of warrior honor yet, it has been a useful mainstay of political action literally since the day the first sword was forged.

Quote
So, you see nothing at all significant in the fact that the state-run news agency of China made a point of saying something so contemptuous and mocking of the US president literally hours after China's leader was here for an official visit?

Kris, no. It's not significant at all. Sure, Trump is a dangerous embarrassment and mocking him is like shooting fish in a barrel. BUT, Chinese state outlets would be trumpeting this meeting as a victory for Xi no matter who was in the White House. China has significant domestic problems and significant international ambitions which only partly overlap with any US interests. State outlets have a vested duty to help prop up the regime - Jesus Christ could be President and Chinese propaganda outlets would still be barking about how God's Son is spineless coward who can't stand up to a real man like Xi.

The US wields a disproportionate influence in global politics but, not *everything* that other countries do is:
A) related to that country's relationship with the US
B) an accurate reflection of any international relationship
I think we've all had a recent demonstration that propaganda works: it changes people's attitudes and actions.  It matters.
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2947 on: April 10, 2017, 09:35:41 AM »

The US wields a disproportionate influence in global politics but, not *everything* that other countries do is:
A) related to that country's relationship with the US
B) an accurate reflection of any international relationship

This is true. And I wasn't arguing the contrary, either in general or in this particular case.

I would guess that you would also say the ways other countries talk in their official statements about this particular American president aren't really important. And in that, you and I will have to agree to disagree.
"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

OurTown

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 337
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Memphis, Tenn.

Gondolin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2949 on: April 10, 2017, 10:18:53 AM »
Quote
I think we've all had a recent demonstration that propaganda works: it changes people's attitudes and actions.  It matters.

I wasn't arguing about the efficacy of propaganda. Your statement is quite correct. Rather, the question was, should we care about the effect of foreign propaganda on foreign populations as a barometer for the likely policy stances of the government producing that propaganda.

Quote
I would guess that you would also say the ways other countries talk in their official statements about this particular American president aren't really important.

I would argue that when it comes to "other country's talk", not all countries are created equally. To my mind, the German election of Steinmeier, Tusk's comments, and various criticisms from the French, German, UK, Austrian (et. al.) governments are far more 'significant' (mostly because they were honest off-the-cuff commentary) than highly censored press clippings coming from a Beijing government with obvious reasons to denigrate the US regardless of who is in the White House. If you don't think that piece was written, vetted, and ready to print before Xi ever got on the plane...

"There cannot be two skies"