Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Vacamion

President Trump & the USA

By Vacamion, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Darkon84

Darkon84

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I like the comprehensive quality of your responses - don't apologise for that! :thumbup:

 

Yeah, the Saudi stuff is annoying realpolitik, but you know what the solution to that is don't you? Get into a position where you're no longer reliant on their oil! (And no, don't replace it entirely with large-scale fracking, that's not going to end well.)

 

I can certainly also give whoever organised the tour and the stops a pat on the back as MC said - there was a lot of different visits to a lot of places that don't really like each other, so kudos to the organisers for that.

 

The Vatican photo thing was something of a stitch-up, I agree there - like you said, there were lots of other pics with the Pope smiling. Like I said, I just hope Trump took something from that visit about considering everyone.

 

Regarding the Paris deal, I think the world leaders have more control than you think. They could break the energy companies if they presented a united front, encourage people to favour renewables and starve the hydrocarbon energy industry of their business except where needed to make plastics etc - but they are not doing so, and Trump right now is at the vanguard of that. While even China and India are breaking out the solar panels, he's looking to boost the coal industry! It's a terrible move.

 

The response to the Manchester incident was certainly different, I'll give him that. Whether it leads to much, only time will tell.

 

The Russia stuff is still bubbling under the surface, but yes - hard evidence is needed.

 

I don't really see how bringing up the Oregon murders was a cheap shot - Trump has been quick enough to speak out on other hate crimes but when this one happened he's said nothing and the guy who did it is most certainly a white supremacist. So...I think at least a little criticism is warranted there. And yes, the Seth Rich murder stinks to high heaven too, though of course the alt-right are using that to fund their own little conspiracy theories.

 

For me though, as I said above the environment and science policy of this administration is the really heinous part of it and the one that could cause serious long term damage, and for that reason alone I'm going to be pretty vociferous. They could be the most socially liberal admin in US history (they're not, but that's another discussion) but as long as their policy on those two things remains the same whatever else they do honestly doesn't matter long term - people don't see that it's important, consider it abstract...but we're talking serious, long term global changes here in a way no other issue reaches. It's frustrating to see people dismiss it.

 

 

 

Appreciate the response mac. I had just written out a fairly concise response but my work pc decided it was the perfect time to crash, therefore losing the reply and about 2 hours work. Unfortunately, you'll now have to wait until tomorrow for the next installment as I'm not writing that all out again, especially when i can run out the door in 5 minutes for a pint. Christ knows I need one after this day lol I'm sure you can't wait! 

 

All the best chaps, see you tomorrow! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vacamion

Vacamion

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

My Trump supporting mate in the USA is also, conveniently, a denier of man made climate change.

 

I love him (my mate, not Trump) but he is a bit of an arse.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Vacamion said:

 

My Trump supporting mate in the USA is also, conveniently, a denier of man made climate change.

 

I love him (my mate, not Trump) but he is a bit of an arse.

 

 

 

Purely out of interest, does he say exactly why?

 

Is it the "scientists invented it to get rich from tax income" angle, or the "it's all nature" angle, or something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vacamion

Vacamion

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Purely out of interest, does he say exactly why?

 

Is it the "scientists invented it to get rich from tax income" angle, or the "it's all nature" angle, or something else?

 

Both of those.

 

For every peer reviewed scientist's article I pass him, he sends me something from something about the Uni of East Anglia falsification.

 

It became too wearing to persist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Vacamion said:

 

Both of those.

 

For every peer reviewed scientist's article I pass him, he sends me something from something about the Uni of East Anglia falsification.

 

It became too wearing to persist.

 

I know the feeling. If someone sends one more article from, say, the ridiculous "Watts Up With That" site, I think I might get...annoyed.

 

Thing is, people don't want to be told that things aren't going to be the same tomorrow - they'd much rather be told that everything is going to be fine. It's so very human...and so very dangerous for the future.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest FriendlyRam

Guest FriendlyRam

Posted
Posted

I don't follow him that much but he's getting pitiful with his tweets, he apparently spends his nights on his own tweeting and watching news TV,, he's a sad lonely old man but a bloody dangerous one.

 

We knew about this months ago but still a disturbing thing to happen tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merging Cultures

Merging Cultures

Posted
Posted
covfefe 

I was ignoring this, because it was just another spelling mistake, which is easy to do. But, this just got a lot sadder.

Spicer had said "a small number of people know what it means". Basically meaning the President can't just say he made a simple typo and pressed send too quickly. Not being able to admit when you're wrong is so weak and a little scary when it's the President.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted

I still find the idea of Active Measures - promoting destabilisation and division of domestic politics - fascinating.

 

Here's a NYT article on Russian oligarchs - working on behalf of the state - hiring freelance activists.

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/28/world/europe/slovakia-czech-republic-hungary-poland-russia-agitation.html?emc=edit_tnt_20170528&nlid=54884496&tntemail0=y&_r=0&referer=

 

Mr. Usovsky’s focus was on marginal political players in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, and his efforts mostly fell flat. The protests organized by Mr. Kasuka and others attracted only handfuls of people. Pro-Russian websites that Mr. Usovsky helped to set up all fizzled. A polish politician he was in touch with, Mateusz Piskorski, was arrested last year on suspicion of spying for Russia.

 

None of that seemed to deter Mr. Usovsky, who was still pitching wild plans and detailed budgets to potential backers in Moscow early this year.

 

His communications offer a revealing glimpse into Russian thinking, ambitions and frustrations. His dealings with the office of Konstantin Malofeev, a nationalist billionaire who was hit with sanctions by the United States over his alleged support for pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine, are especially notable.

 

After Mr. Usovsky managed to orchestrate only a few tiny demonstrations in Prague, Warsaw and other cities, an assistant to Mr. Malofeev demanded in October 2014 that Mr. Usovsky produce “a clear, concrete and realistic plan for the coming to power of pro-Russian forces.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UPinCarolina

UPinCarolina

Posted
Posted

It's gotten to the point here in the United States that Trump is almost universally thought of as a buffoon, or at least as strikingly incompetent. Even his die hard supporters are unimpressed.

Actually terrifying how awful this White House is at anything resembling governing. They exist solely to be regressive.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted

@MattP

 

Moving things over to the right thread...yes, nowt has gone wrong spectacularly yet, but he's only been in the job four months and Dubya had a whole three years before he started screwing things up proper - give him time.

 

Like pulling out of the Paris agreement today, for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted
Just now, leicsmac said:

@MattP

 

Moving things over to the right thread...yes, nowt has gone wrong spectacularly yet, but he's only been in the job four months and Dubya had a whole three years before he started screwing things up proper - give him time.

 

Like pulling out of the Paris agreement today, for instance.

Didn't he promise to do that if elected? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Collymore

Collymore

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, MattP said:

Didn't he promise to do that if elected? 

Yep. Just playing devils advocate but people voted for him knowing this would happen so they're to blame for electing him. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, MattP said:

Didn't he promise to do that if elected? 

Absolutely. That people then elected him anyway,  knowing this, speaks volumes about those who elected him.

 

What's your take on it?

 

5 minutes ago, Collymore said:

Yep. Just playing devils advocate but people voted for him knowing this would happen so they're to blame for electing him. 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, true. Doesn't make the situation any better, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Absolutely. That people then elected him anyway,  knowing this, speaks volumes about those who elected him.

 

What's your take on it?

A bit bemusing, probably doing it as it's one of the few promises he's able to enact.

 

Although he states he wants to enter into negotiations straight away, so he clearly doesn't intend to stay out of it for long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, MattP said:

A bit bemusing, probably doing it as it's one of the few promises he's able to enact.

 

Although he states he wants to enter into negotiations straight away, so he clearly doesn't intend to stay out of it for long.

You'd hope not, but if that's the case then why leave it in the first place? It's not like the polluting interests and anti-science folk are going to take them going back into it just after they've left very well, they'll still consider it a broken promise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bovril

bovril

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

@MattP

 

Moving things over to the right thread...yes, nowt has gone wrong spectacularly yet, but he's only been in the job four months and Dubya had a whole three years before he started screwing things up proper - give him time.

 

Like pulling out of the Paris agreement today, for instance.

If only his father had.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, bovril said:

If only his father had.

 i was just about to type this out and i scrolled down to the last post and your candy arse stole  it. Lol. If only! 

Edited by Jattdogg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkon84

Darkon84

Posted
Posted

Sorry @leicsmac for not fulfilling my promise of replying the other day, my week took a busy turn so I haven't had the time to reply correctly. The moment and train of thought has long gone to reply properly I'm afraid, but I'll give you one thing from it....I take back the 'cheap shot' comment. The debate has moved on now anyway so we'd only be taking a step back.

 

With regards to the news of Trump pulling out of the Paris agreement last night, neither of us are surprised, and as Matt said, it's at least one election promise he can actually stand by and people will have voted for this (rightly or wrongly). Also, he has said he's willing to re-negotiate immediately and just feels the 18% the USA has to reduce by (second only to China's 20%) is unfair and actually costs more to implement than it's worth. According to a UN report, if I remember correctly, they concluded that the amount of Carbon savings we are making at the moment are only enough to 'prolong the Earth's lifetime by 0.02%' (I hate that description, the Earth isn't going to die because Trump pulled out of the agreement). Similar to Brexit, it can take up to 4 years to fully pull out of the agreement, so, all chances are, by the time that occurs (unless a new deal is agreed), a new president will probably be coming in and will agree to step back in at the old rates. Juncker's responses and jibes certainly haven't done him any favours and just highlights why so many people are against Globalists like him. Petty, spiteful, vindictive and righteous. 

 

On the upside, it has caused the United States Climate Alliance to immediately add 7 new states to it's membership who all individually do their part to reduce their own levels to the levels required by the Paris Agreement (roughly), thus showing that should individual states want to, they can do their own thing anyway, regardless of what Trump or the Agreement say. The Paris Agreement has no fines or actual power to punish any country should they fail to reach their designated targets anyway, only to 'name and shame', which I doubt any country would be bothered about anyway. The lack of discipline leads me to believe that many countries won't make their targets anyway. 

 

I'm all for everyone being more sustainable and everyone doing their part to reduce carbon emissions, but after reading more about the Paris Agreement, it's not really 'all that'. I'd personally like to see repercussions for not getting within a percentage of your target so that Countries actually have to do it, and I'd also be more happy if deforestation/re-forestation clauses were implemented in to it for a start.

 

A couple of other, quick. random points of interest too (not so much Trump related, but USA related):

Hillary is still losing the plot and has now said there were 1000 Russian spies and Facebook colluding against her to make her lose the election. That's around the 20th excuse she's used now and still not once blamed herself, or her lack of campaigning in the rustbelt states. It's embarrassing now.

 

The Sydney Peace Foundation is planning to honour Black Lives Matter with it's Global peace prize in November. Wow, just wow. The same organization who encouraged riots, violence against whites, violence against police, and bans white people from attending any of their meetings, or black only memorial day parties - because segregation is good now?

 

Rant over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Darkon84 said:

Sorry @leicsmac for not fulfilling my promise of replying the other day, my week took a busy turn so I haven't had the time to reply correctly. The moment and train of thought has long gone to reply properly I'm afraid, but I'll give you one thing from it....I take back the 'cheap shot' comment. The debate has moved on now anyway so we'd only be taking a step back.

 

With regards to the news of Trump pulling out of the Paris agreement last night, neither of us are surprised, and as Matt said, it's at least one election promise he can actually stand by and people will have voted for this (rightly or wrongly). Also, he has said he's willing to re-negotiate immediately and just feels the 18% the USA has to reduce by (second only to China's 20%) is unfair and actually costs more to implement than it's worth. According to a UN report, if I remember correctly, they concluded that the amount of Carbon savings we are making at the moment are only enough to 'prolong the Earth's lifetime by 0.02%' (I hate that description, the Earth isn't going to die because Trump pulled out of the agreement). Similar to Brexit, it can take up to 4 years to fully pull out of the agreement, so, all chances are, by the time that occurs (unless a new deal is agreed), a new president will probably be coming in and will agree to step back in at the old rates. Juncker's responses and jibes certainly haven't done him any favours and just highlights why so many people are against Globalists like him. Petty, spiteful, vindictive and righteous. 

 

On the upside, it has caused the United States Climate Alliance to immediately add 7 new states to it's membership who all individually do their part to reduce their own levels to the levels required by the Paris Agreement (roughly), thus showing that should individual states want to, they can do their own thing anyway, regardless of what Trump or the Agreement say. The Paris Agreement has no fines or actual power to punish any country should they fail to reach their designated targets anyway, only to 'name and shame', which I doubt any country would be bothered about anyway. The lack of discipline leads me to believe that many countries won't make their targets anyway. 

 

I'm all for everyone being more sustainable and everyone doing their part to reduce carbon emissions, but after reading more about the Paris Agreement, it's not really 'all that'. I'd personally like to see repercussions for not getting within a percentage of your target so that Countries actually have to do it, and I'd also be more happy if deforestation/re-forestation clauses were implemented in to it for a start.

 

A couple of other, quick. random points of interest too (not so much Trump related, but USA related):

Hillary is still losing the plot and has now said there were 1000 Russian spies and Facebook colluding against her to make her lose the election. That's around the 20th excuse she's used now and still not once blamed herself, or her lack of campaigning in the rustbelt states. It's embarrassing now.

 

The Sydney Peace Foundation is planning to honour Black Lives Matter with it's Global peace prize in November. Wow, just wow. The same organization who encouraged riots, violence against whites, violence against police, and bans white people from attending any of their meetings, or black only memorial day parties - because segregation is good now?

 

Rant over.

 
 

That's no problem at all - know what it's like to be suddenly busy. :thumbup:

 

I'll cover the bottom two things you mentioned first because the Paris thing is going to be something of a rant of my own.

 

Regarding Hillary - yep, the campaign she ran was bloody awful and that was one of the major reasons that she lost...however that, in my opinion, wasn't the only factor at work. I believe gerrymandering (when the Repubs changed the voting boundaries the last time) may have had a certain part to play, and also there may have been an effort at voter suppression through making it difficult to vote for some demographics in various places too. I thought neither of those things would be a real factor before the election and it's possible they didn't add much weight, but as Trump won despite losing the popular vote and with a low turnout of voters from particular demographics (though that again could be traced back to the Clinton campaigns probable incompetence) I'm not prepared to dismiss them as possibilities out of hand. The Russian connection is much more tenuous, but the pieces from Foxxed make some fascinating reading about how a nation state with good resources could manipulate the election of another in a totally deniable way. Of course it'll never be proven - they're far too smart for that, but...

 

Regarding BLM, I think we've discussed this before, but I'll reiterate: while I might not agree with their methods, they have a more than legitimate grievance. There are still some huge problems regarding race in certain parts of the US (definitely not all though) IMO, particularly in the area of law enforcement. These problems aren't going away, and need to be talked about, but people turn the other way or dismiss them because they're not personally affected (that plays rather neatly into the point I'm going to make about Paris, actually). It's sad that it's come to pretty extreme ways to shock people out of apathy (though some have responded by doubling down and hardening their stance), but now that it's happening I'm hoping there will finally be some more meaningful dialogue on the matter in places where it needs to happen.

 

And regarding the Paris agreement...

 

The US (and China, and India), as both leading economies and leading contributors to current climate emissions, should be leading the field and setting an example to others regarding reducing emissions and switching to energy sources that don't result in various other ground, water and air pollution (this isn't all about the CO2, after all). China is beginning to roll out vast swathes of solar panels (largely because people are finally getting tired enough with city smog to force the government to do something about it, but hey), India is making vast leaps in this regard as well. And the US? Looking to go backwards, driven seemingly by folks who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Yes, the agreement is largely symbolic, but by pulling out of it - even if it is just to renegotiate - Trump (and the people that voted for him) are showing quite clearly that they do not consider the future of the environment to be high priority; either because they truly believe the Earth is ours to do with as they wish, or because they're too motivated by short-term self-interest to care about it at all. This is an issue where, quite frankly, you shouldn't be haggling about the damned money. The length of time taken to pull out of it and the finnicky reasons for renegotiation just add to my conclusion that it's symbolic and sends a message to a bunch of anti-science planks that they've won this one - a message that absolutely should not be encouraged as they absolutely should not be emboldened to get their message out further.

 

Also, if the environmental arguments don't sway people, the economic ones should: renewables are becoming an economic powerhouse already, and that's only going to get bigger as time goes by and the cost of manufacturing decreases as a result. Why is the US (at the federal level) seeking to distance itself from a slice of that pie, or at least make it unnecessarily difficult to obtain?

 

You're right when you say the Earth is certainly not going to die: there have been at least five events in history that have caused more damage than we ever could...but we're likely not going to do ourselves and a few other species that get caught in the crossfire any favours (we've got a pretty good record on causing extinctions of other complex species already, come to that), so why take that gamble at all? Look to something beyond the end of your own life (not you personally but you know what I mean), for once. Elon Musk, one of the few entrepreneurs I respect hugely because he does exactly that (though I'm sure there's a fair amount of ego in there too), is now distancing himself from White House science advising for that reason, which is a damn shame.

 

I'm glad that some states are stepping in to take their own measures on this (hey, "states rights" can work well at times, who knew? :D), and I would definitely like to see regulation with teeth on this matter (sadly it falls foul of most UN regulations on that matter in that it can't really have any). I'd also like to see reforestation and also pollution clean-up clauses in the contract, as you do.

 

To conclude, it's not really the potential direct consequences of this that irk and worry me - it's the indirect consequences that I mention above that do, and what they could lead to.

 

As a final thing, here's a snapshot of some of the world reaction to the news.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40128266

Edited by leicsmac
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...