Where debating everything under the sun is only the beginning

Quote from: ersi on 2017-01-06, 19:49:57

And put Hillary where she belongs.

Where would that place be? 

Where do you get this idea anybody wants to go war? This is a serious question.

The CIA is supposedly liberal or something now?

Oakdale wants to go to war. Isn't it obvious, seriously? Because he brought up war out of the blue.

We need to respond to evolving threats from states like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea . . . As President, I will make it clear, that the United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack. We will be ready with serious political, economic and military responses. (my emphasis)

Quote from: ersi on 2017-01-06, 23:26:15

Oakdale wants to go to war. Isn't it obvious, seriously? Because he brought up war out of the blue.

…Yes, out of the blue — after Senator John McCain called the supposed Russian hacking "an act of war!"
I don't, of corse, want to go to war; but we've been in a cyber war for years now…

About "following" the presidential race, I don't read tweets and I didn't attend any Trump rallies. Nor do I consider campaign rhetoric that important; specially not off-the-cuff remarks.

BTW, ersi: You have no idea how big the executive branch is, do you?

So, for consistency, admit that W was as liberal as Obama is and that Trump will be none better.

So you actually have ("suggestive") evidence of it to your satisfaction.

Your definition of "liberal" is -shall we say?- too liberal?

You'll take your "cheap shots" and I'll sometimes reply, without any hope that you'll understand. (Perhaps others are silly enough to read our exchanges.) How's Estonia doing, nowadays? Not yet the communist paradise you dreamed of? Oops!

I think Trump is right about NATO obligations; and Estonia is an ally. Should we, the USA, go to war with Russia if Estonia's borders are broached? In a sane world, no. It would be too dangerous. But, in the real world, yes. Estonia is an ally. We have treaty obligations… Surely, Russia knows this?

Nations make treaties. Other nations need to recognize them, or face the consequences.

I don't see Russia and the US as adversaries, in most situations… We're both powerful nations who have interests. Recognizing those interests should be our focus, no?!

And surely you can back any of this up with a quote from Trump. Meanwhile, German politicians held a meeting with Trump specifically to figure out his foreign policy, but they were unable to detect any. I came to the same conclusion months ago without any need to meet him.

I came to the same conclusion months ago without any need to meet him.

Quote from: Belfrager on 2017-01-08, 14:23:37

I came to the same conclusion months ago without any need to meet him.

You've always done this: Your opinion is what it is; no evidence needed, none accepted. You still seem to think that you can "define" words to mean anything you want…

Hey! You must be a bigot!

I suspect Putin's Russia will; fairly quickly, if it doesn't already.

Sure, since their GDP fell from USD 2.2 trillion to USD 1.3 trillion in a couple years. You're might be right, though. Both Putin and Trump like to beat their chests as their countries burn. Maybe they play the fiddle, instead....

Have you considered the possibility that Trump doesn't actually have much of a foreign policy, beside being Putin's puppet?

As Victor Davis Hanson said: "On matters of foreign policy, Trump is not a realist, isolationist, or neoconservative, although at times he can sound like all that and more. Instead, he is a Jacksonian who wants a huge club at the Department of Defense largely to ensure that he’ll never have to use it. And if he is pushed to swing it, he wants to flatten any who would hurt the U.S."

Do you find this a problem, ersi?

The facts are: Trump has no political background or track record, so he's not a political anything. He's a political nobody. He has no policies, particularly in the foreign/international realm. Most realistically, if his behaviour will match his words, we can expect about as bad a mess as we had with W. But there's no guarantee his words are any sort of guide to anything.

You want to know what Trump's foreign policy will be, but you're too "insulated" to understand: He's an American. That, in and of itself, befuddles you!

Who will be the president of Estonia? Or the PM of Great Britain? And who cares?
Of course, Vlad Putin will still rule Russia…

Do you seriously think that nations only react to what they expect? (I assume you're a bachelor…)

The world isn't coming to an end. Only some very silly progressive presumptions.

(I'm surprised that so many Europeans are as butt-hurt as our American progressives… I'd been led to believe that they were smarter. Guess I was wrong to believe that!)

Again, I say: When Trump is President you'll see what his foreign policy is…
(Don't forget the example of Ronald Reagan!)

The facts are: Trump has no political background or track record, so he's not a political anything. He's a political nobody. He has no policies, particularly in the foreign/international realm. Most realistically, if his behaviour will match his words, we can expect about as bad a mess as we had with W. But there's no guarantee his words are any sort of guide to anything.

Lula hadn't had any significant political background, and the expectations on his new administration as President of Brazil were quite disturbing. On the first weeks of his administration, it became clear that it wouldn't be as bad as it was being expected.

Now, several years after it finished, we've become aware that it was really disastrous.

(Don't forget the example of Ronald Reagan!)

Oh, like Iran/Contra

WASHINGTON — In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.
(read the whole NYTimes article)