leicsmac Posted 9 January 2018 Share Posted 9 January 2018 2 hours ago, MattP said: A piece I read in the Sunday Times this weekend for a bit of balance for the thread. This is fair enough. Of course, Trump's supporters aren't going to be fazed by any of this - that very quality, the bombast, the feeling of superiority, the obsessions with "winning" that results in all that has been seen from him - is the very quality they value highest in them. It makes them think that they're still top dogs, that the system that favoured them for so long still does (and it still does, just to a lesser degree). He tells them that it's alright to be coarse, to feel superior, and they want to feel that way, so they lap it up. And nothing anyone in any section of the media says is going to convince them otherwise. The problem is that it's the kind of manoeuvre that's only really good once at the ballot box. Trump mobilised his voting base brilliantly, and I'm sure he'll do so again given the chance - but he pretty much maxed out his voting numbers. And with that, his winning still relied on depressed turnout from certain demographics in key areas who were (rightly) put off by the idea of Clinton, a woman who would do nothing for them. That's not going to be the case in 2020, not after everything that has happened and will happen between now and then - not unless the DNC is hellbent on self-destruction by putting up a candidate like her again...which is of course possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 9 January 2018 Share Posted 9 January 2018 (edited) US to loosen nuclear weapons constraints and develop more 'usable' warheads https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/09/us-to-loosen-nuclear-weapons-policy-and-develop-more-usable-warheads?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Edited 10 January 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vacamion Posted 9 January 2018 Author Share Posted 9 January 2018 So is it the case that Trump going full madman and threatening nuclear war has brought the Koreas together? Looking forward to him solving the middle east crisis by picking a fight with Hezbollah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Buce Posted 9 January 2018 Popular Post Share Posted 9 January 2018 2 minutes ago, Vacamion said: So is it the case that Trump going full madman and threatening nuclear war has brought the Koreas together? Looking forward to him solving the middle east crisis by picking a fight with Hezbollah. Yeah, he might make a korea out of it... 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 9 January 2018 Share Posted 9 January 2018 1 hour ago, Buce said: Yeah, he might make a korea out of it... He's putting his heart and seoul into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 Against my better judgement, this actually looks like the Don closing a deal and getting the job done Trump touts 'bill of love' for Dreamers and raises sweeping immigration reform https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/09/trump-daca-immigration-reform-congress-dreamers?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 I have now made up my mind that The Donald is quite mad .... Unfortunately i see this as the start of a perfect storm type scenario .. I think The Donald was probably guarded by a mad woman and a nasty Rotweiller when he was young. God help us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buce Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 US to loosen nuclear weapons constraints and develop more 'usable' warheads https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/09/us-to-loosen-nuclear-weapons-policy-and-develop-more-usable-warheads Thinking of nukes as usable is the surest sign that you shouldn't have them. No wonder half the world despises the Yanks - the Great Satan indeed. This is the most dangerous time for the world since the Cuba missile crisis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 The SK President giving Trump some credit for bringing NK to the table regarding the Olympics and other issues: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42636101 Whether the pressure from the US was directly responsible or not, both Koreas actually sitting down at a table again can only be a good thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 17 minutes ago, leicsmac said: The SK President giving Trump some credit for bringing NK to the table regarding the Olympics and other issues: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42636101 Whether the pressure from the US was directly responsible or not, both Koreas actually sitting down at a table again can only be a good thing. I think this was obvious wasn't it to everyone not clouded with rage over Trump? It couldn't be a coincidence that North Korea finally wants to do some talking when someone more powerful takes a hard line with them. A welcome change from the appeaser in charge for the eight years before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 21 minutes ago, MattP said: I think this was obvious wasn't it to everyone not clouded with rage over Trump? It couldn't be a coincidence that North Korea finally wants to do some talking when someone more powerful takes a hard line with them. A welcome change from the appeaser in charge for the eight years before. It's more that they're happy to start breaking the South Korean pact with the US now they've got the weapons to make America think twice about attacking it. As was always going to be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 22 minutes ago, MattP said: I think this was obvious wasn't it to everyone not clouded with rage over Trump? It couldn't be a coincidence that North Korea finally wants to do some talking when someone more powerful takes a hard line with them. A welcome change from the appeaser in charge for the eight years before. It could entirely be coincidental, what with the change in Korean government recently and the Olympics coming up in any case, hence my qualification of remark. Might have been responsible, might not, might be something in the middle. I would have thought that was obvious to everyone not clouded with support for Trump. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: It's more that they're happy to start breaking the South Korean pact with the US now they've got the weapons to make America think twice about attacking it. As was always going to be the case. Not sure about that, but if so certainly a great argument for nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: It's more that they're happy to start breaking the South Korean pact with the US now they've got the weapons to make America think twice about attacking it. As was always going to be the case. Can't say I agree with that - if the NK's use their weapons they get annihilated, no matter how many and how far they reach. I maintain them having such weapons doesn't affect much more than international prestige and ego - the military situation remains the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 (edited) 1 minute ago, leicsmac said: Can't say I agree with that - if the NK's use their weapons they get annihilated, no matter how many and how far they reach. I maintain them having such weapons doesn't affect much more than international prestige and ego - the military situation remains the same. Of course, but they have no intention of using them. They believe they'll act as a deterrent. In years gone by they would but who knows with the loony in the white house. They've said it explicitly in the past and in the last week or so. Edited 10 January 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 no matter what the outcome, Trump's handling of the NK situation has been childish and unprofessional to say the least. not particularly an example you'd want the rest of the world's leaders to start following tbqh. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, MattP said: Not sure about that, but if so certainly a great argument for nuclear weapons. I think the fact that even a significant number of American lawmakers are concerned about the president's rights, coupled with the news they are loosening the rules of engagement, shows exactly why no country can be trusted with them. Also, we have our own independent deterrence so why we allow another country to keep theirs on our soil I've no idea. Edited 10 January 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 Interesting debate here. 4 minutes ago, toddybad said: Of course, but they have no intention of using them. They believe they'll act as a deterrent. In years gone by they would but who knows with the loony in the white house. They've said it explicitly in the past and in the last week or so. Yeah, exactly. But they won't deter the US should they use them, so I'm not sure of how much more a bargaining chip they are than what they had already - that's the point I'm making, I don't think that development has much to do with these talks. 3 minutes ago, lifted*fox said: no matter what the outcome, Trump's handling of the NK situation has been childish and unprofessional to say the least. not particularly an example you'd want the rest of the world's leaders to start following tbqh. Childish and unprofessional it might be, but it also might have been effective - though that would need proof as to be the case. 2 minutes ago, toddybad said: I think the fact that even a significant number of American lawmakers are concerned about the president's rights, coupled with the news they are loosening the rules of engagement, shows exactly why no country can be trusted with them. Also, we have our own independent deterrence so why we allow another country to keep theirs on our soil I've no idea. There's lots of arguments for and against proliferation, some of which have been covered on here. One thing I will say (and I may well be wrong here because there is some expert disagreement in the field) is that there is no such thing possible as a 'limited' nuclear war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 9 minutes ago, toddybad said: I think the fact that even a significant number of American lawmakers are concerned about the president's rights, coupled with the news they are loosening the rules of engagement, shows exactly why no country can be trusted with them. Also, we have our own independent deterrence so why we allow another country to keep theirs on our soil I've no idea. My comment was nothing to do with America. I was just saying if your analysis is correct that it's North Korea at the table because they have developed nuclear weapons then it's one of the best argument I have seen for them. Hopefully this is the first stage of the last native population on earth effectively held in a prison by their own government being freed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogstanley Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 Did Obama try and claim credit for the talks the north and south held two years ago and the ones before that? Listening to the trumpers you'd think they'd never held any talks ever before. Fact is the north have blatantly ignored trump over and over again, as well as dishing out some comical personal insults. Somehow I don't think they respect the dotard as much as he thinks they do. South Korea have to toe the line and massage trumps ego of course, they rely on America's support in the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajthefox Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 Does anyone else actually think he may well last a full term? At first it was "he'll never get the nomination" then "he'll never win it" and it's been "it's only a matter of time now.." for the last year and yet, on he goes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 49 minutes ago, ajthefox said: Does anyone else actually think he may well last a full term? At first it was "he'll never get the nomination" then "he'll never win it" and it's been "it's only a matter of time now.." for the last year and yet, on he goes. If people have more money in their pockets and unemployment continues to fall he could get elected again. The popular vote in places like California and New York will obviously go up against him but it means nothing if they don't win back states like Michigan and Penn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 10 January 2018 Share Posted 10 January 2018 3 minutes ago, MattP said: If people have more money in their pockets and unemployment continues to fall he could get elected again. The popular vote in places like California and New York will obviously go up against him but it means nothing if they don't win back states like Michigan and Penn. It's going to be interesting, that's for damn sure. Penn, Michigan, Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin - all places that he won and would have to hold on to. Again, for me, that depends a lot on turnout - minority groups in particular - but quite frankly given how things shift from day to day it's near impossible to predict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 11 January 2018 Share Posted 11 January 2018 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/10/new-york-city-sues-shell-exxonmobil-and-other-oil-majors-over-climate-change/?utm_term=.81d662026da4 Not entirely sure how well this will do in court, but it's interesting reading, especially the responses from the oil and gas companies themselves - even they acknowledge that climate change is a global issue and needs to be handled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 11 January 2018 Share Posted 11 January 2018 he's not getting anywhere near a second term lol. he will either be impeached, imprisoned, assassinated or he'll die from the stress of the job. or he'll blow up half the world. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts