124
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 05:16 pm
@ehBeth,
and Hurlburt today

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/07/trump-is-making-a-foreign-policy-mess-that-cant-be-fixed.html


Quote:
The emergency is real, all right. The ground is indeed shuddering beneath our feet. It’s not about whether NATO summits come off well though, as it is about the steady degradation of the principle that U.S. international relations have long been built around. I’m referring here to mutual commitments and shared interests and values — above all, the rule of law — that transcend the challenges of the moment. Trump seeks to destabilize not just the NATO we have right now — already deeply challenged by Russia and by illiberalism across Europe — but the very idea that anything bigger or more lasting than his own interests defines American interests.



back to brand $$$ and elites
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 05:33 pm
@ehBeth,
The Pew polling revealed some interesting attitudes among the people of NATO member nations:

The most damning results were to the question "If Russia got into a serious military conflict with one your neighboring countries a) Would the US responded militarily and b) Should your nation respond militarily?

Of the ten populations polled in only four did a majority feel that their nation should respond. A majority of every population believe the US would make good on its commitment to respond militarily; with the lowest results being Poland - 57% and Hungary - 55%.

60% of the populations polled don't believe their nations should meet their treaty obligation, and 100% are confident that the US will. That's pretty remarkable

Huge kudos to the Dutch!

69% of those polled had faith in the US (second only to Spain at 70%), but even more (72%) believed their nation should come to the aid of an ally.

Similarly, more Poles believed Poland should respond (62%) that did those who believed the US would (57%)

Faith in the US was at 60% or higher in every Western European nation and Canada. I can understand why Poles and Hungarians may have had fewer true-believers. Their histories are such that they have every reason to distrust superpowers and they were not among the nations saved from or assisted in fighting the Nazis

Greeks were the least interested in seeing their nation respond militarily, but at least they are willing to fund NATO at a rate in excess of their commitment - 2.6% which is second only to the US. Italy is second from the bottom and contributes a pitiful 1.2% so what is their excuse? Maybe all those jokes about their cowardly military have some truth to them.

The ever proud French came in at 53% but it was still a majority. Good for them. Our good friends in Canada came in at 58%. Not to disparage them in any way but if those polled gave the question any thought they would have realized the only neighboring country that would fit the question is the US, and clearly, we are going to respond to any attack against us by Russia, but if we lost, Canada would be next so joining the fray would seem to be the only sensible course of action other than surrendering to the Russians.

Major disappointments were Germany & the UK. The people of both nations are very confident the US will stick by the treaty, but only 40% and 45%, respectively feel their nations should. Is anyone really prepared to argue that their opposition to spending more on their military is not based on their desire to let the US carry the load for them? Frankly, I would be ashamed of Americans as a whole if we responded similarly. Do these people think they are being clever, or do they realize they are thinking like selfish, spoiled children and simply don't care?

Of the 28 NATO members, only 5 meet or exceed the agreed upon level of spending (and I'm including Poland at 1.99%)

16 nations (including Canada - 1.29%, and Germany - 1.24%) can't even manage 1.5%. My new best buddies the Dutch are lower down than Italy with a lousy 1.15% but at least they are willing to put their asses on the line (or at least say they are in a poll Smile )

It is surprising and disappointing that only one of the Eastern European and Baltic States is paying what they promised - Estonia at 2.08. There are 12 nations in this group and while countries like Poland, Romania, and Latvia are close (Closer than Canada & Germany), half of them fall below the 1.5% mark. Arguably, NATO is more important to this group than it is to all the other members since if Russia should ever decide to move on Europe, it's not going to leapfrog any of these countries AND they are well aware of what Russian occupation is like. (I haven't included Turkey in this group because its ties to Europe and the West are dubious and I feel pretty certain that under their current government they will renege on treaty obligations at the first shot. They are deadbeats and their willingness to allow their NATO allies to use their airbases or to fly through their airspace is sketchy at best. The weapons they buy with their 1.48% are just as likely to be used on one of their NATO allies as on Russia or any other invader.

The polling also shows that a plurality (close to a majority at 48%) of Americans feel that NATO members are not pulling their weight. This is unfair to several nations (most notably the UK) that have been willing to join the US (in a significant way) in sending troops to conflict areas, but as a whole, it's probably going too easy on NATO.

Finally, the Pew poll showing a surge in support for NATO among Democrats has nothing to do with a sudden increase in historical perspective and strategic acumen among these folks and everything to do with their antipathy for Trump and his scolding of NATO deadbeats. Another perfect example of this TDS symptom was how the left fell in love with Kim Jung Un's sister when she appeared at the Olympics. It was no coincidence that it occurred during the time Trump was exchanging harsh rhetoric with Kim. As soon as Trump spoke nicely about Kim after their meeting these same folks rushed to remind us of what a monster he is.

The drop in approval of US leadership of NATO is neither surprising nor alarming. Deadbeats rarely appreciate being reminded that they owe money and they love US presidents who begin their first term by embarking on an international Apology Tour during which they assure the rest of the world that the US will stop being such a dickhead. There is zero evidence that the US was better off in terms of geopolitics during the 8 years of Obama's presidency because the average Berliner, Londoner, or Belgian viewed him as a pop-idol.

It is unfortunate that for some of these people, the only exposure they have to Trump is biased, overwhelmingly negative coverage in world media outlets like the BBC. Notice Poland's regard has increased by 8% and I would venture to say that Trump visit and speech there had a lot to do with that.

I'm not a Rasmussen subscriber so I couldn't see the entire article but the 52% favorable rating among Americans corresponds pretty nicely with Pews finding of 48% who think NATO doesn't do enough. It's worth noting though that the title of the article is "Support for NATO is down"

It's unfortunate that none of the polling organizations seem to have asked Americans the obvious questions about how they feel about NATO members not meeting their spending obligations, and whether or not they think Trump is right to pressure them to do so now.

I have a very favorable view of the treaty, but that is not the same as viewing all of its members favorably in terms of the fulfillment of their treaty obligations. Should the deadbeat nations fail to meet their spending commitments I don't believe the US should withdraw from NATO, but I don't believe Trump is inclined to do so (He would require the approval of the Senate, and that's not going to happen.) He could, to one degree or another, have the US disengage in various ways. Less participation in joint training exercises, less actual US dollars going to run its administrative organization, etc. None of such things would truly degrade NATO's ability to respond to a military crisis, but they would send a message. The message would likely fall on deaf ears as far as the deadbeats go, but it's a lot better than allowing them to continue to duck their obligations without any consequence at all. If the only consequence is continued hectoring from Trump, that's good enough for now, perhaps, just perhaps, it will lead to the people of these nations assessing their national character.
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 05:44 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
The problem with your lovely analysis is that noise by #45 isn't making things better. Other countries had started moving toward the 2024 funding goal, but citizens/voters are questioning increased involvement with the US. I've talked to my MP about it a couple of times in the past few months (weeks actually) as well as my hometown MP.
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 05:46 pm
@ehBeth,
from one of the links

https://www.axios.com/trump-european-trip-nato-summit-united-kingdom-putin-meeting-949184d3-d5f7-4f4d-8c3d-c80358b102a5.html


Quote:
Between the lines: The European officials we’ve spoken to would love nothing more than for Trump to take a victory lap and claim credit for them boosting their defense spending. (Anything to avoid divisive scenes in Brussels that would make Putin’s day.) And they would love to believe these reassuring words from Trump administration officials.

The bottom line: But we've yet to speak to a NATO member official who feels confident that Trump will actually say what his aides say he will say. And that's a uniquely severe problem for foreign officials dealing with this administration.

"When you’re talking to Mattis it’s a normal conversation and you imagine for a moment you’re dealing with a normal administration," a senior European official told us. "But then you look at Trump’s Twitter feed and you realize none of it matters."
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 07:26 pm
@ehBeth,
If Trump wasn't making noise the deadbeats would have done nothing. The citizen/voters don't have to like Trump. They do have to permit their governments to meet an obligation to which they agreed on the people's behalf, and which is intended to protect those people's assess, not Trump's...unless, of course, they have no honor.

If they want to try and persuade their elected officials to cut or reduce ties with the US, they can knock themselves out as far as I'm concerned, but they owe NATO, not the US so trying to bring Trump into their excuses for not paying up is bullshit. If they want to pull out of NATO to avoid paying or because they can't stand Trump they can do that too, but they should first take a look at that Pew poll and realize that their neighbors weren't too fond of the idea of coming to their rescue when they were a member of NATO and leaving isn't going to stiffen the spines of their former allies if they should get in trouble. Any nation that pulls out of NATO better not expect the US to come running when they call for help...they'll be better off calling the Dutch.

I'm sure your MP loves talking to you and maybe he or she will heed your advice or acquiesce to your request/demands. That's lovely too. It's a big part of the democracy NATO defends. While you're on the phone why don't you encourage your MP to make good on Canada's pledge to NATO. When your nation isn't a deadbeat, I'll listen to its voice on NATO a lot more seriously when it comes to US leadership.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 07:38 pm
@blatham,
If you want to play coy and disingenuously claim that the Democrats don't rely upon external advisers fine. With their presidential candidate sub-contracting out opposition research (aka creating a phony document) to an international firm with former intelligence agency operatives and ties to Russian officials, the claim is a bit laughable. But never mind, just answer my questions.

What is wrong with external advisers (regardless of their size) recommending justices they are convinced are not stealth liberals?

How does this advice constitute engineering the makeup of the Court?

Do you think Ginsburg and Breyer need added security?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 07:45 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The Russian's meddling in our election succeeded beyond their wildest dream and not because it had any effect what-so-ever on the outcome.


With less than 80,000 votes in 3 states deciding the outcome and ~10MM fewer voters showing up than 2008, you can't KNOW this to be true.


There's a lot I don't know for certain, but without evidence to the contrary, I believe what makes the most sense and all my sense have seen or heard on this topic is that hacking our voting system is incredibly problematic, if not impossible, and there is no evidence that it occurred. My chief source? President Obama. I also have read and heard that so-called Russian Troll Farms posted ridiculous memes on FB suggesting such things as Clinton is in league with Satan. Now if you want to believe that turned the election, be my guest, but the burden of proof is on you.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 07:50 pm
@Blickers,
I commend you for your research.

Now tell me if that research turned up a treaty or actual written agreement that covered the Soviet Union transferring territorial rights to the Crimea to Ukraine?

If there was then I will acknowledge that you have the better of this debate, but I doubt you will be able to convince Putin of it.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 08:35 pm
@ehBeth,
Chait's thesis (that Trump's corruption re Russia is far more likely to be worse than we now understand rather than more innocent than we presently know) is extremely compelling.

And of course what adds to this horrid picture is the near total abdication of principle and responsibility from the GOP, simply for reasons of political power.

And then there's the kicker of a right wing media universe that is delighted to misinform citizens about damn near everything.

Trump is not responsible for those last two but he has helped to reveal the true nature of both institutions.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 08:41 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
If you want to play coy and disingenuously claim that the Democrats don't rely upon external advisers fine.
That is not even close to anything I suggested or implied.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 08:59 pm
Quote:
President Trump Rocks! Gives Germany Hell for Investing Heavily in Russia

I am sure there is something that happened in the Middle Ages that caused Merkel to bow to the Russians. If there is we are sure to find out. If not, what?
Quote:
GERMANY IS INVESTING IN RUSSIA, NOT DEFENSE

As the White House reported today, President Trump delivered a clear message to America’s allies at NATO: The Transatlantic Alliance is too important not to invest in [pay the money for defense that they committed to].

While we sanction Russia, Merkel is sending Russia cash and plenty of it. Germany funnels money through a new direct pipeline with Russia.

The media and U.S. left won’t mock Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. Yet, the money she pays them for gas goes directly to the Russian military.

http://www.independentsentinel.com/president-trump-rocks-gives-germany-hell-for-investing-heavily-in-russia/


0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 09:51 pm
Antifa hoodlums soon to be treated like the KKK, the Nazis and Communists, the thugs, the tong societies, the Yakusa, the Sicilian Mafia, and MS 13 etc.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/‘unmasking-antifa-act-includes-15-year-prison-term-proposal/ar-AAzTJzI?ocid=sf
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 09:53 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I don't know, but perhaps it really it was said "we get up within days".
Whatever Merkel )or any other chancellor)says, especially budgetwise, the parliament (and the voter) has to approve it.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 10:57 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
Antifa hoodlums soon to be treated like the KKK, the Nazis and Communists, the thugs, the tong societies, the Yakusa, the Sicilian Mafia, and MS 13 etc.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/‘unmasking-antifa-act-includes-15-year-prison-term-proposal/ar-AAzTJzI?ocid=sf

Sometimes putting "url" codes around a link will break a link that otherwise works. So it is best to not use them if they aren't necessary.

But if a link doesn't work, often adding "url" codes will fix it.
Code:[url]........[/url]
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 11 Jul, 2018 10:58 pm
Quote:
KAVANAUGH THREATENS THE LEFT’S RIGHT TO CHEAT

It sure does.
Quote:
Realizing how widely reviled their ideas are, several decades ago the left figured out a procedural scam to give them whatever they wanted without ever having to pass a law. Hey! You can't review a Supreme Court decision!

Instead of persuading a majority of their fellow citizens, they'd need to persuade only five justices to invent any rights they pleased. They didn't have to ask twice. Apparently, justices find it much funner to be all-powerful despots than boring technocrats interpreting written law.

Soon the court was creating "rights" promoting all the left's favorite causes -- abortion, criminals, busing, pornography, stamping out religion, forcing military academies to admit girls and so on.

There was nothing America could do about it.

OK, liberals, you cheated and got all your demented policy ideas declared "constitutional rights." But it's very strange having elected legislators act as if they are helpless serfs, with no capacity to protect "rights."

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-07-11.html#read_more
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 12 Jul, 2018 01:44 am

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/07/this-is-not-america-paul-manafort-is-being-tortured-in-solitary-confinement-by-dirty-cop-mueller-and-his-corrupt-gang/
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Thu 12 Jul, 2018 06:40 am
Obviously, Trump doesn't like May's approach to Brexit and her new strategy paper - he's asking whether it is really what people who voted to leave the European Union want.
Quote:
He said: "I would say Brexit is Brexit. The people voted to break it up so I would imagine that's what they would do, but maybe they're taking a different route - I don't know if that is what they voted for."

He added it seemed as if the UK was "getting at least partially involved back with the European Union"."I'd like to see them be able to work it out so it could go quickly," he said.
[...]
Mr Trump also waved away protests that will feature during his visit to Britain, which starts on Thursday afternoon and comes as Mrs May pushes for a post-Brexit trade deal with America.

He said: "I think that [the British] people like me a lot and agree with me on immigration. I think that’s why they voted for Brexit."
The Telegraph
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Thu 12 Jul, 2018 07:07 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Yuck. The turd has landed. I feel dirty just knowing it's in the same country as me.
Below viewing threshold (view)
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.15 seconds on 07/20/2018 at 09:56:29