Edit - And while this isn't policy per se, it is the shithead having an impact internationally. Which is why I posted it here.
I kind of doubt anyone -suddenly- came to that action because of trump
No, but typically they can't quote the President of the United States defending their actions.
And it provides a justification on the international stage. Sure, it's flimsy. But the US diplomatic corps will have a harder time condemning it*, when it's literally the words of the President made manifest.
* Assuming they're professional diplomats, and not Trump-appointed flunkies that would probably cheer this shit on.
And that is not an easy thing to build again from the ground up.
Yep. American foreign policy is going to be a bit of a disaster for the mid-termcentury at least.
My estimate is probably not THAT hyperbolic. Trump is still going to be President for two more years, so unless people stick it out (assuming they're not dismissed) or people are willing to return after an extended hiatus, it's going to take a long time to get the systematic entrenchment needed to understand the nuances needed to properly do the job.
This isn't a job you can get on ZipRecruiter and slip right into. Diplomacy requires relationships, and it's very much a case of "one size doesn't fit all". America's friends (assuming Donald doesn’t burn ALL the bridges) will be tolerant of cultural faux pas, especially if made in an honest attempt to please the hosts. But neutral countries are going to be less forgiving, and less neutral countries are going to be offended.
If both houses flipped and a meteor composed of pure Impeachium landed on the White House Wednesday morning, the main damage would still be the relationships more than the State Department itself. The current administration is an incredibly bad-faith actor, probably the worst since the United States first had substantial foreign affairs, and a lot of people are going to remember that clearly when it comes to a lot of potential or actual agreements with Washington in the future.
"Is it worth it? I mean, they'll tear this up the moment another Trumpist administration comes in" is going to be hanging over everything, and at the moment there are no non-Trumpists of any real significance in the Republican Party. It's untrustworthy in the present, and shakily dependable at best going forward. Half the possible administrations for the next few decades are going to have an enormous question mark hanging over them.
+13
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
The ideal future would be the next administration puts a bunch of protections in place to reassure both us and the world that this can't unilaterally occur again.
Which will probably happen to ~some~ degree but not nearly enough to be meaningful in restoring the hegemony.
The ideal future would be the next administration puts a bunch of protections in place to reassure both us and the world that this can't unilaterally occur again.
Which will probably happen to ~some~ degree but not nearly enough to be meaningful in restoring the hegemony.
Well... you have to assume that the rest of the world will accept that shit won't be completely disregarded again.
A lot of what's happening on the international stage is not JUST becaus Trump is a petulant jackass who doesn't understand how things are supposed to work.
It's that he's a petulant jackass WDNUHTASTW, with who the Legislature have completely abdicated all responsibility. He rules by fiat only because Congress are feckless. A majority of his decisions could easily be put in check if Congress gave a damn.
Examples, Congress puts Magnitsky sanctions in effect, Trump deletes the department that enforces it, Congress reinstates it.
Trump claims tariffs under spurious "national defense" provisions, Congress fights him on that.
Trump makes veiled threats re Article 5, Congress steps up and reasserts their responsibility to control War Powers.
As much as people want to put all the blame on Trump, that Congress is complicit in letting him do so, is the reason it's so bad.
And if they can let the President overwhelm the Legislature now, and have a demogogue disregard them, who's to say they won't the next time one comes to power.
This is NOT a tyrant in power. This is a systemic breakdown of ceded authority. Hopefully that gets a wakeup call Tuesday, and fixed early January.
But that's what other countries need to consider. Not just a dipshit in charge, but an entire infrastructure of cowardice failing to keep him in check. And I don't know how you put safeguards on that, when the existing safeguards just get ignored.
"Axios on HBO" asked Trump whether it bothered him that the Saudi-led coalition has been using U.S. bombs to kill civilians.
"Bother's not strong enough," Trump replied. "That was basically people that didn’t know how to use the weapon, which is horrible."
"I'll be talking about a lot of things with the Saudis," he continued, "but certainly I wouldn't be having people that don't know how to use the weapons shooting at buses with children."
Pretty sure the killing of civilians is a feature, not a bug, for the Saudis.
"Axios on HBO" asked Trump whether it bothered him that the Saudi-led coalition has been using U.S. bombs to kill civilians.
"Bother's not strong enough," Trump replied. "That was basically people that didn’t know how to use the weapon, which is horrible."
"I'll be talking about a lot of things with the Saudis," he continued, "but certainly I wouldn't be having people that don't know how to use the weapons shooting at buses with children."
Pretty sure the killing of civilians is a feature, not a bug, for the Saudis.
This kind of sounds like groundwork for having a mercenary army take over the killing. Like his main issue is that we’re only making money off the sale of weapons and not also accruing a “managed services” fee...
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
"Axios on HBO" asked Trump whether it bothered him that the Saudi-led coalition has been using U.S. bombs to kill civilians.
"Bother's not strong enough," Trump replied. "That was basically people that didn’t know how to use the weapon, which is horrible."
"I'll be talking about a lot of things with the Saudis," he continued, "but certainly I wouldn't be having people that don't know how to use the weapons shooting at buses with children."
Pretty sure the killing of civilians is a feature, not a bug, for the Saudis.
This kind of sounds like groundwork for having a mercenary army take over the killing. Like his main issue is that we’re only making money off the sale of weapons and not also accruing a “managed services” fee...
Maybe. You're not going to get a merc air force though, and I'm not sure what mercenary boots on the ground would get you. Specifically I don't see even the Saudis being able to afford enough mercenaries to do anything other than kill civilians and provide convenient targets for the locals to shoot at.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
He's not trying to get more money for training or anything. He's saying that our bombs are the best bombs. The smartest bombs. If they blow up children it's because of some stupid person over there, not our super smart awesome bombs, and we have no culpability. Which is why we are going to keep selling them the best bombs that we make and sell, really, for a steal. We're practically cutting our own throat.
The idea that the US military should be something that can be hired like an escort by foreign nations is beyond disgusting and it's a testament to how bad things have gotten that people aren't actively calling trump out for even vaguely flirting with the idea.
"Axios on HBO" asked Trump whether it bothered him that the Saudi-led coalition has been using U.S. bombs to kill civilians.
"Bother's not strong enough," Trump replied. "That was basically people that didn’t know how to use the weapon, which is horrible."
"I'll be talking about a lot of things with the Saudis," he continued, "but certainly I wouldn't be having people that don't know how to use the weapons shooting at buses with children."
Pretty sure the killing of civilians is a feature, not a bug, for the Saudis.
Later, when the agency’s head of drone operations explained that the CIA had developed special munitions to limit civilian casualties, the president seemed unimpressed. Watching a previously recorded strike in which the agency held off on firing until the target had wandered away from a house with his family inside, Trump asked, “Why did you wait?” one participant in the meeting recalled.
He only says he cares because his base will lap it up, and will ignore all of the other evidence that he doesn't remotely give a fuck about human life.
"lol Trump lies" isn't news. I get this. I'd suggest that he's losing the concept of permanence, that we record the things he says and does, but I don't think that's it. As always, he just doesn't care about reality, because his base will eagerly embrace whatever stance he puts before them, no matter the cognitive dissonance or mental gymnastics involved.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
+5
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
"Axios on HBO" asked Trump whether it bothered him that the Saudi-led coalition has been using U.S. bombs to kill civilians.
"Bother's not strong enough," Trump replied. "That was basically people that didn’t know how to use the weapon, which is horrible."
"I'll be talking about a lot of things with the Saudis," he continued, "but certainly I wouldn't be having people that don't know how to use the weapons shooting at buses with children."
Pretty sure the killing of civilians is a feature, not a bug, for the Saudis.
Later, when the agency’s head of drone operations explained that the CIA had developed special munitions to limit civilian casualties, the president seemed unimpressed. Watching a previously recorded strike in which the agency held off on firing until the target had wandered away from a house with his family inside, Trump asked, “Why did you wait?” one participant in the meeting recalled.
He only says he cares because his base will lap it up, and will ignore all of the other evidence that he doesn't remotely give a fuck about human life.
"lol Trump lies" isn't news. I get this. I'd suggest that he's losing the concept of permanence, that we record the things he says and does, but I don't think that's it. As always, he just doesn't care about reality, because his base will eagerly embrace whatever stance he puts before them, no matter the cognitive dissonance or mental gymnastics involved.
From everything I've read, he's been surprised at people writing things he actually says down for a long time. He just could not care less about reality.
He's not trying to get more money for training or anything. He's saying that our bombs are the best bombs. The smartest bombs. If they blow up children it's because of some stupid person over there, not our super smart awesome bombs, and we have no culpability. Which is why we are going to keep selling them the best bombs that we make and sell, really, for a steal. We're practically cutting our own throat.
He's not trying to get more money for training or anything. He's saying that our bombs are the best bombs. The smartest bombs. If they blow up children it's because of some stupid person over there, not our super smart awesome bombs, and we have no culpability. Which is why we are going to keep selling them the best bombs that we make and sell, really, for a steal. We're practically cutting our own throat.
As Wednesday went on, the dismay in Russia was palpable, with state media reporting that—in light of the midterm results—recent meetings of Kremlin officials with National Security Adviser John Bolton were pointless and there is no longer any need for Vladimir Putin to meet with Trump in Paris during First World War commemoration ceremonies this week. TV host Soloviev remarked: “There’s nothing left to talk about,” as “the sanctions will never be canceled.”
Ah yes, our friends. The Russian government.
Appearing on Russian state-TV program Evening With Vladimir Soloviev, Vyacheslav Nikonov, the chairman of the State Duma Committee for Education and Science, pontificated that “Trump’s impeachment would lead to an armed uprising, a revolution, and a gigantic economic crisis... America might not survive this.” Previously on the program, Andrey Sidorov, deputy dean of World Politics at Moscow’s State University, caustically noted that “Unfortunately, Trump didn’t reach the level of Abraham Lincoln and didn’t drive the United States to civil war. That’s sad. Hopefully, he’ll become Herbert Hoover and at least drive them into a Great Depression.”
US-North Korea talks are stalled. Trump says he's "in no rush."
Meanwhile, South Korea pushes forward with third set of talks with North Korea.
GEE WHIZ, I can't imagine why North Korea is stalling on its talks with the US. It's as though previous US administrations insisted upon multilateral, united-front talks for a reason.
US-North Korea talks are stalled. Trump says he's "in no rush."
Meanwhile, South Korea pushes forward with third set of talks with North Korea.
GEE WHIZ, I can't imagine why North Korea is stalling on its talks with the US. It's as though previous US administrations insisted upon multilateral, united-front talks for a reason.
My guess is that they don't see the point; they're already getting tons of stuff for free since trump's convinced himself that he's solved the NK problem so why would they bother to do any sort of real action?
US-North Korea talks are stalled. Trump says he's "in no rush."
Meanwhile, South Korea pushes forward with third set of talks with North Korea.
GEE WHIZ, I can't imagine why North Korea is stalling on its talks with the US. It's as though previous US administrations insisted upon multilateral, united-front talks for a reason.
My guess is that they don't see the point; they're already getting tons of stuff for free since trump's convinced himself that he's solved the NK problem so why would they bother to do any sort of real action?
This is the part that concerns me. Because while he'll hold onto that belief well past the point of rationality, if it ever becomes untenable, that it's obvious that he's been played, I am concerned about the backlash.
I mean, we saw how temperamental he was when he felt ignored by KJU. I don't know how close we came to a shooting war, but I am 100% convinced it was on the table in the White House.
But I shudder at this guy feeling slighted or betrayed, the toddler with access to the nuclear codes.
Posts
Asking for a friend.
No, but typically they can't quote the President of the United States defending their actions.
And it provides a justification on the international stage. Sure, it's flimsy. But the US diplomatic corps will have a harder time condemning it*, when it's literally the words of the President made manifest.
* Assuming they're professional diplomats, and not Trump-appointed flunkies that would probably cheer this shit on.
No. The President is a civilian and is not subject to military law
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/11/state-department-empty-ambassador-to-australi/574831/
And that is not an easy thing to build again from the ground up.
Yep. American foreign policy is going to be a bit of a disaster for the mid-term at least.
My estimate is probably not THAT hyperbolic. Trump is still going to be President for two more years, so unless people stick it out (assuming they're not dismissed) or people are willing to return after an extended hiatus, it's going to take a long time to get the systematic entrenchment needed to understand the nuances needed to properly do the job.
This isn't a job you can get on ZipRecruiter and slip right into. Diplomacy requires relationships, and it's very much a case of "one size doesn't fit all". America's friends (assuming Donald doesn’t burn ALL the bridges) will be tolerant of cultural faux pas, especially if made in an honest attempt to please the hosts. But neutral countries are going to be less forgiving, and less neutral countries are going to be offended.
This is generational damage that Trump is doing.
"Is it worth it? I mean, they'll tear this up the moment another Trumpist administration comes in" is going to be hanging over everything, and at the moment there are no non-Trumpists of any real significance in the Republican Party. It's untrustworthy in the present, and shakily dependable at best going forward. Half the possible administrations for the next few decades are going to have an enormous question mark hanging over them.
Which will probably happen to ~some~ degree but not nearly enough to be meaningful in restoring the hegemony.
A lot of what's happening on the international stage is not JUST becaus Trump is a petulant jackass who doesn't understand how things are supposed to work.
It's that he's a petulant jackass WDNUHTASTW, with who the Legislature have completely abdicated all responsibility. He rules by fiat only because Congress are feckless. A majority of his decisions could easily be put in check if Congress gave a damn.
Examples, Congress puts Magnitsky sanctions in effect, Trump deletes the department that enforces it, Congress reinstates it.
Trump claims tariffs under spurious "national defense" provisions, Congress fights him on that.
Trump makes veiled threats re Article 5, Congress steps up and reasserts their responsibility to control War Powers.
As much as people want to put all the blame on Trump, that Congress is complicit in letting him do so, is the reason it's so bad.
And if they can let the President overwhelm the Legislature now, and have a demogogue disregard them, who's to say they won't the next time one comes to power.
This is NOT a tyrant in power. This is a systemic breakdown of ceded authority. Hopefully that gets a wakeup call Tuesday, and fixed early January.
But that's what other countries need to consider. Not just a dipshit in charge, but an entire infrastructure of cowardice failing to keep him in check. And I don't know how you put safeguards on that, when the existing safeguards just get ignored.
https://www.axios.com/trump-saudis-arabia-yemen-bombs-4253534a-0043-457c-b3aa-84d6bca18ce3.html Pretty sure the killing of civilians is a feature, not a bug, for the Saudis.
This kind of sounds like groundwork for having a mercenary army take over the killing. Like his main issue is that we’re only making money off the sale of weapons and not also accruing a “managed services” fee...
Maybe. You're not going to get a merc air force though, and I'm not sure what mercenary boots on the ground would get you. Specifically I don't see even the Saudis being able to afford enough mercenaries to do anything other than kill civilians and provide convenient targets for the locals to shoot at.
As always, this has a heaping helping of bullshit.
He only says he cares because his base will lap it up, and will ignore all of the other evidence that he doesn't remotely give a fuck about human life.
"lol Trump lies" isn't news. I get this. I'd suggest that he's losing the concept of permanence, that we record the things he says and does, but I don't think that's it. As always, he just doesn't care about reality, because his base will eagerly embrace whatever stance he puts before them, no matter the cognitive dissonance or mental gymnastics involved.
From everything I've read, he's been surprised at people writing things he actually says down for a long time. He just could not care less about reality.
So he's CMOT Obadiah Stane, now?
With the speech pattern of Foul Old Ron.
Ah yes, our friends. The Russian government.
When you tell the truth, but like it's a joke.
Fucking cold blooded!
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Pretty dick move considering Hoover's work at the ARA.
It's the Lincoln insult that really makes it top of it's class though.
Donald Trump? Also a Republican.
Hehhhh? Heehhhhhhhh? :eh:
It's an insult thrown at Lincoln, saying he started the civil war.
They are trolling.
I am making a joke in reference to Trump's comments on the campaign trail: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/22/trump-most-people-dont-know-president-lincoln-was-a-republican/
He probably only found out that day, as is usually the way when he's all like "a lot of people don't know that".
Steam | XBL
US-North Korea talks are stalled. Trump says he's "in no rush."
Meanwhile, South Korea pushes forward with third set of talks with North Korea.
GEE WHIZ, I can't imagine why North Korea is stalling on its talks with the US. It's as though previous US administrations insisted upon multilateral, united-front talks for a reason.
"But I do, 'cause I'm smart. S M R T, smart!"
My guess is that they don't see the point; they're already getting tons of stuff for free since trump's convinced himself that he's solved the NK problem so why would they bother to do any sort of real action?
This is the part that concerns me. Because while he'll hold onto that belief well past the point of rationality, if it ever becomes untenable, that it's obvious that he's been played, I am concerned about the backlash.
I mean, we saw how temperamental he was when he felt ignored by KJU. I don't know how close we came to a shooting war, but I am 100% convinced it was on the table in the White House.
But I shudder at this guy feeling slighted or betrayed, the toddler with access to the nuclear codes.
...What?