US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Bleiente

Then I misunderstood this.
@u_crank
I apologize sincerely and in all form.

Thank you and I appreciate that. No hard feelings.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Catfish

This is of course about Sarah Yeong, which is why i wrote all this and provided a link you do not bother to read. She has b.t.w. apologized meanwhile. Yes, the New York Times defended her. Big deal. Regarding crossing a line this began much earlier.

We seem to disagree there. My original post was about the New York Times and their decision to hire her. Here is the thing. I support Ms. Yeong's right to say anything she wants. And I support the Times right to hire anyone they want. That doesn't mean they can't be criticized for it. And they should be. It was a dumb thing to do. It was a very political thing as well. They admit that they knew about the tweets but hired her anyway. That to me speaks volumes about their political stance. I'm not criticizing the stance, but rather the decision to hire someone with extreme views.

There is a couple of double standards at play here. The first one is that had this writer been a conservative and had said similar things about black people and women the outrage would have been never ending. But in the politically correct world of identity politics white people are an easy and safe target.

Then there is the case of Kevin D. Williamson. Williamson is an excellent writer with conservative view points. He is also a never Trumper. This spring he was hired by the left leaning Atlantic. Some of his past opinions about abortion and the death penalty were dug up. Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg bowed to outrage from the left and fired Williamson before he ever wrote an article.

That anyone who is not on the alt-right side suddenly feels molested and attacked, and now bites back shocks you? What the hell do you expect, all suddenly shut up and listen to, and believing in, Fox News?

I have a hard time understanding some things you say. Who is the alt-right and how much influence do you think they have in mainstream conservative thought? I think you would be surprised to find that it is almost negligible. Go to some of the American conservative online magazines and look for yourself. These are the sites I frequent almost daily. National Review Online, The Federalist, The American Spectator, and RedState/Townhall to name a few. Maybe I am missing something but I see no overt opinion in these publications that would be considered alt-right. Maybe the definition needs clarification. I find that these publications have a balanced opinion on average. They are far more representative of conservative thought than Fox News or Breitbart. National Reviews' senior editor Jonah Goldberg and contributer David French are anti Trumpers. Editor Rich Lowry has been critical of Trump and has felt the backlash.

Oh yes "the left". It is moving lefter every second. The sky will fall. Only that what happens here has nothing to do with the "left", but with common sense, taste and anyone who happens to dislike racism, sexism and hate speech being made socially acceptable by the loony right, from Fox to Breitbart to The daily caller to Bannon to Trump and his supporters.

I feel that you are casting a very wide net here. That being said my personal opinion is that the left/progressives/Democrats are in a bind. They have no clue about what to do about Trump and have become hysterical and their only recourse is to become more extreme. It is noticeable. Example...Former Presidents Clintons' and Obamas' views on immigration and gay marriage from just 10 years ago would not stand in todays Democratic party. They would be run out of town. There can be no diversity of opinion. That's not the way to get elected. Obama had 8 years to learn that lesson but he didn't. The result is...President Trump.

Coming to my accusation of you would applaud Sheong if she had written this in Fox News about black people, i take that back. Sorry.

Thank you and I appreciate that. I think you are a good guy and I enjoy our 'friendly discourse'. Peace.

[Jimbuna]

Further sanctions against Russia over the suspected use of chemical weapons with the lokelihood of more in ninety days should Russia fail to give reliable assurances that it will no longer use chemical weapons and will allow on-site inspections by the United Nations.

Fat chance of that happening I reckon.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45126207

[Skybird]

Companies being affected by US bans will be protected

How?



The EU is completely impotent here.The law they activated, is just empty posing.

The difference between trade volumina with the US, and Iran, is a factor around 37.

The EU law even threatens penalties against companies obeying the American sanctions. That is more planned economy then, and does not differentiate between security-relöevant and -irrelevant business deals. Its pointless in its core.

The EU can protect nobody here. It just practices meaninglessness here.

And that is good in this case. The Iran "deal" never should have been signed in the first, was just another Obamarian daydream. The Europeans would be willing to trade their own skin away, if that helps to keep their precious illusions.

[Catfish]

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-ir...-idUKKBN1KR0XK

https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/...Iran-sanctions

Trump successfully bullies moderate and reformist Rouhani, so there will soon be a hardliner government back at the helm, in Iran. Polls show that the majority of Americans were in favour of the Iran deal. Does Trump think China or Russia will not sell technology to the Iran, if the West turns away completely?

Those right-wing falcons always have those easy solutions for everything, but wouldn't it be better to keep a foot in the door along with having some influence and insight, instead of driving Iran into the arms of Trump's good friend Putin?

That the US withdraws does not mean the JCPOA plan is dead though, since there are other nations involved.

[Catfish]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/s...y-hunting.html

[Skybird]

In the main Trump bullies an Iran that is one of the biggest financiers of Islamic global terrorism, the biggest source of unrest and war export in the region, and that despite all the honey it pours into European ears nevertheless is after the nuclear bomb.


I do not know whether Trump knows all this indeed, or cares - or just finds the grain by random chance after picking around blindly. The effect is what counts. Iran must be isolated and contained, its nuclear ambitions strictly controlled, its support of terrorism punsihed.



The UN watchdog's role is fully compromised since long, so it canot be trusted.


To call Rouhani a "reformer" and a "moderate", always was just an euphemism to me, a Western expression of more wishful thinking. He has always been unshaken in supporting the Iranian bomb program. He just learned from Allah who is claimed to be the greatets deceiver of all, and he is not stupid enough to tell the Europeans about it all the time.

[Jimbuna]

I was in Iran (Khorramshahr) for a month way back in 77, the Shah had not long left by then and even back then I noticed a change in attitude for the worse toward the west.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

[...] He has always been unshaken in supporting the Iranian bomb program. He just learned from Allah who is claimed to be the greatets deceiver of all, and he is not stupid enough to tell the Europeans about it all the time.

Bullsh. You are almost as bad informed as those brexiteers. Just what you feel about something does not hold water on close inspection. You can think about Rouhani what you want, but he sure is no 'hawk'.

"President Rouhani says religion forbids pursuit of WMDs"
"Generals told to let diplomacy do its work"
"Rouhani says Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons 'on principle'

President Hassan Rouhani also urged Iran’s military leaders to let diplomacy prevail in dealing with potential foreign threats, in a clear reference to efforts to end the nuclear dispute and decades of hostile relations with the west"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...pons-principle

The next iranian president will not be that shy for sure.

The US has once more broken a treaty, if it was a real deal or not does not matter. Trump just tries to undo everything Obama did, it is a childish personal thing. If Trump's talks with North Korea have shown anything, it is that you need the bomb to be accepted.
If the deal falls apart, Iran could theoretically restart its nuclear program pretty quickly. Do you think Israel can sleep better now with China and Russia at the backdoor.


quote Jim Buna:

I was in Iran (Khorramshahr) for a month way back in 77, the Shah had not long left by then and even back then I noticed a change in attitude for the worse toward the west

After the Shah? SAVAK anyone? You don't say?
How repressive was the Shah's regime in Iran before 1979

"Some verifiable history — the CIA [UK operation BOOT, US operation AJAX), operating out of that U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1953, maliciously and illegally overthrew a relatively democratic and liberal parliamentary government, and with it the 1951 Time magazine man of the year Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, because Mossadegh insisted that Iran’s oil wealth enrich Iranians, rather than foreign corporations. The CIA installed a dictatorship run by the Shah of Iran who quickly became a major source of profits for U.S. weapons makers, and his nation a testing ground for surveillance techniques and human rights abuses. The U.S. government encouraged the Shah’s development of a nuclear energy program. [...]." And so on.

http://www.newclearvision.com/2013/0...-up-in-tehran/

From 2013: An unhappy 60th birthday - The CIA coup of 1953 still resonates in Iran

I do not say that what came afterwards was any better for the civilian people of Persia, but all this sure did not help the western nations win much sympathy.

[Skybird]

Double standards of the NYT.



https://translate.google.com/transla...tml&edit-text=

[Skybird]

As I said, Catfish. Rouhani pours right that honey into Westerner's ears that they want to hear. But before he emerged victorious in elections, in the background he always was a strong supporter of an Iranian nuclear bomb. That is true for practically all candidates in the past couple of election races. Another one would not have gotten the allowance of the guardians council and the religious elite anyway.


You just fall for words like a mouse falls for spam. The porblem is that peope, like you tend to have ENDLESS patience - until facts are created and nothing can be done anymore. With Iran you defend a terror exporter, religious fanatic - and now you want to give the time and opportunity he needs to aquire the bomb and harden the rule of the ayatollahs by easing the pressure from the street: by allowing them economic success and stability.

[Catfish]

You better inform yourself a bit about the history of Persia/Iran, and why things are as they are, now. I can even recommend some good books about all this.
If Rouhani really wants the bomb (i'm sure the generals want it, and the coming-up hardliners) you should wonder where he only got this idea

[Skybird]

Oh, I know Iran a bit myself, thanks. I even have several months of live first hand experience there. Its the one country in the Islamic world where I stayed longer than in any other.

[vienna]

<O>

[Skybird]

I wonder whether the constant detoriation of relations between Turkey and the us over the past 10+ years may escalate in Turkey leaviong or beiogn thrown out of NATO.


Mind you, it started long before Gülen or Syria and the Kurds, but back in 2003 when Turkey denied US forces to use US bases in Turkey as launching platforms for operations in the war in Iraq. The same quarrel rose again in 2014 over the US attacks on IS in Syria, and was refused to let fall silent again in 2016.


Today the Donald has annoucned a doubling of tariffs on Turkish steel and aluminiumm making them 50 and 25%. With erdoghan provng to be an economic dilletantee and the Lira in free fall, this could become costly for Turkey - and the ECB region as well who once again is invited to invest Euros for nothing but a megalomaniac illusion (= supporting the Lira).



I say let Turkey fall. Economic and financial troubles are what could bring people to the streets and can kick Erdoghan out of office, maybe even trigger a coup that this time then was not most likely staged by Erdoghan himself. Since the military however has lost its function as guardian of a now dead Kemalist constitgutional order, that is somewhat unlikely, however. Too many AKP believers now have hijacked the armed forces at too many ranks and levels.



The only setback is that the EU and especially the Germans stand ready to once again sacrifice their own fincial interests for the sake of supporting a de facto hostile regime spitting them in their face at every opportunity. The damage of Trump's decision will go at the cost of bills to be paid in Euros, not dollars.



Meanwhile the ordinary German blockhead cares for nothing more than his next vacation at the Turkish reviera.