Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
GostHacked

The road to 2020

Recommended Posts

On 11/29/2019 at 11:54 AM, Moonlight Graham said:

The entirety of the West needs to stand up to China and they need to do it together, they need to form a bloc and f*** them hard to show them who's boss.

 

So where was the west when people were warning it 30 years ago that....

Bah...what's the point?

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

All nation states logically pursue there own interests first...this is true whether it be China, Canada, or the United States.   The EU is a separate critter with a larger population than America, but is seemingly held to a weaker/lower standard vis-a-vis "standing up to" China.    American policy (like Canada's) has sought to engage and develop China's economy for/with western market investment for over 25 years.   China will not be deterred from realizing the potential that a population of 1.5 BILLION middle class consumers represents.   China is now # 1 in many business sectors.

All states do not pursue the national interest.  In the US and Canada for instance, most politicians are paid off and lobbied by big corporations, so politicians begin to follow policies that will please these powerful interests rather than what will benefit the country or the electorate so that they will gain the campaign money they feel they need to be re-elected.  Politicians logically pursue their own pet interests which can vary widely. ie: Bernie Sanders wants big money out of politics, while Trump wants illegals out of the country.

The EU has less total GDP than the US and doesn't house the world's largest corporations nor can it as move quite as easily politically as one entity like the US since more nations involved.  Doesn't matter.  Both are powerful economic entities.  The US can go it alone and act in its interests vs China and ignore what Canada and EU etc are doing, or they can all team up since they are a much more powerful economic bloc if acting together and therefore have a far stronger negotiating position on any policy vs China. The economic (and security) interests of the US, EU, Canada, New Zealand etc are very similar in regards to China.

13 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Frankly, I find the reliance on President Trump as the strongman trade and military leader against China while holding him is such despicable low regard to be quite comical, given that many other "western" nations/leaders lack the will and means to do so.   Canada would be doing so regardless of who is U.S. president.

My political expectation is that Trump will seek to settle with China to win on trade at some level before the 2020 election, if only to take the sting out of criticisms for his sledgehammer tariffs, just as he did with Canada and Mexico.   But this does not mean that China will be stopped from pursuing its regional and global strategy.

There are limits to American power that even Trump has to respect.    Can't fight the Chinese, Russians, radical Islamists, narco states, etc. while keeping other foreign minister(s) happy on trade and the "post WW2 order" with far less contributions from the "west"

Trump was smart to stand up to China but an arrogant fool to go it alone.  At least Bush got the Brits on his side when going into Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

What's the saying? 

Weak times create strong people. Strong people create strong times.  Strong times create weak people. Weak people create weak times.  Weak times create strong people....and cycle continues.

 

1514597154612.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2019 at 10:47 AM, Moonlight Graham said:

If Trump was removed and replaced with someone who shares Trump's general "America First" philosophy but did in a way that wasn't arrogant, ignorant, and racist, then i'd want them to win. 

Or at least by someone who wasn't a blithering imbecile in hock to the Russians.

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

All states do not pursue the national interest.  In the US and Canada for instance, most politicians are paid off and lobbied by big corporations, so politicians begin to follow policies that will please these powerful interests rather than what will benefit the country or the electorate so that they will gain the campaign money they feel they need to be re-elected.  Politicians logically pursue their own pet interests which can vary widely. ie: Bernie Sanders wants big money out of politics, while Trump wants illegals out of the country.

 

...and these are all nation state interests by definition, including the big corporations.   Politics will always be about big and small money, regardless of what Bernie and others think about it.

 

Quote

The EU has less total GDP than the US and doesn't house the world's largest corporations nor can it as move quite as easily politically as one entity like the US since more nations involved.  Doesn't matter.  Both are powerful economic entities.  The US can go it alone and act in its interests vs China and ignore what Canada and EU etc are doing, or they can all team up since they are a much more powerful economic bloc if acting together and therefore have a far stronger negotiating position on any policy vs China. The economic (and security) interests of the US, EU, Canada, New Zealand etc are very similar in regards to China.

 

That's right...it doesn't matter, because the EU wants all the benefits of an economic union without such responsibilities.   The EU, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, and South Korea depend on the United States to carry most of the load despite having a larger combined GDP and population than America.   Trump is correct to call this out and attack the trade imbalances, IP theft, transshipments, tariffs, etc. as well as the military spending deadbeats.  

During Canada's federal election campaign, foreign policy was hardly mentioned at all and there was no demand/expectation to do so, unlike in the United States where candidates in the 2020 election will not be able to blow it off. 

 

Quote

Trump was smart to stand up to China but an arrogant fool to go it alone.  At least Bush got the Brits on his side when going into Iraq.

 

The EU and Canada are economic competitors for the U.S, not "allies", ready to jump in bed with China all the same.   It shouldn't take a Donald Trump or U.S. election campaign (e.g. 2016) to call out and engage the obvious.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Argus said:

Or at least by someone who wasn't a blithering imbecile in hock to the Russians.

 

But this is what it took to challenge China....sure wasn't going to come from all the "smart" leaders in Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

That's right...it doesn't matter, because the EU wants all the benefits of an economic union without such responsibilities.   The EU, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, and South Korea depend on the United States to carry most of the load despite having a larger combined GDP and population than America.   Trump is correct to call this out and attack the trade imbalances, IP theft, transshipments, tariffs, etc. as well as the military spending deadbeats

Canada letting US control international security is in Canada's interests.  You can't defend and admire China for pursuing its own interests and then sh!t on Canada for doing the same.  If the US does most of the heavy lifting for Canada etc that's the US's choice, they're more than able to speak up and force the issue, as Trump has been doing but not really (more talk than anything).

But remember, the US controlling western security and the global order is in their interests too.  They get to mold everything to benefit the US the most.  The US has made a lot of money by controlling the middle east, Latin America, Africa etc and selling them weapons etc.

Edited by Moonlight Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Canada letting US control international security is in Canada's interests.  You can't defend and admire China for pursuing its own interests and then sh!t on Canada for doing the same.  If the US does most of the heavy lifting for Canada etc that's the US's choice, they're more than able to speak up and force the issue, as Trump has been doing but not really (more talk than anything).

 

Canada isn't "letting" anything...it is incapable of doing otherwise.   Trump is not the first U.S. president to express such views and policies, and he won't be the last.

The post WW2 "grand bargain" is coming to an end....the United States is broke.

 

Quote

But remember, the US controlling western security and the global order is in their interests too.  They get to mold everything to benefit the US the most.  The US has made a lot of money by controlling the middle east, Latin America, Africa etc and selling them weapons etc.

 

Has also made a lot of money in China.   China is now a bigger U.S. trading partner than Canada, which will also be overtaken by Mexico soon.

Trump and others are correct to remove the U.S. from international conflicts that are not in direct U.S. interests....like the destabilizing Ukraine and Russia.

President Obama also shifted away from Europe to Asia...before Trump.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Canada isn't "letting" anything...it is incapable of doing otherwise.   Trump is not the first U.S. president to express such views and policies, and he won't be the last.

The post WW2 "grand bargain" is coming to an end....the United States is broke.

Canada could completely remove itself military overseas if it wanted, what is the US going to do about it?  Even domestically, it's in US's interests to defend Canada against any attack from Russia, China etc because the US doesn't want any unfriendly country getting any military foothold in north america.  Canada is a friendly and docile neighbour and will do just about anything to keep such a neighbour.

Quote

Trump and others are correct to remove the U.S. from international conflicts that are not in direct U.S. interests....like the destabilizing Ukraine and Russia.

It's in the US's interests to not have Russia gain power in Ukraine, and especially prevent it from annexing any part of it.  The US competes with Russia for power and influence throughout the world.  Most anywhere in the world the US leaves, the Russia/China/Iran crew will probably fill the vacuum.  Happened in Syria and Iraq.  Zero sum game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Canada could completely remove itself military overseas if it wanted, what is the US going to do about it?  Even domestically, it's in US's interests to defend Canada against any attack from Russia, China etc because the US doesn't want any unfriendly country getting any military foothold in north america.  Canada is a friendly and docile neighbour and will do just about anything to keep such a neighbour.

 

Canada has already done so from a practical military level.   Canada is no longer a middle power and cannot sustain operations abroad without the assistance of "allies".   Canada declined to be part of missile defense, and was shocked to learn that the U.S. is under no obligation to intercept ballistic missiles headed north of the border.    Trump and other presidents have already made identical NATO deadbeat policy speeches.

 

Quote

It's in the US's interests to not have Russia gain power in Ukraine, and especially prevent it from annexing any part of it.  The US competes with Russia for power and influence throughout the world.  Most anywhere in the world the US leaves, the Russia/China/Iran crew will probably fill the vacuum.  Happened in Syria and Iraq.  Zero sum game.

 

Nope....the exact opposite.   The Ukraine is where NATO's expansion stops, as it is destabilizing.   Ditto Belarus or Georgia.   Syria has long been a Russian client state.

Many of the 2020 candidates would slash U.S. military spending for debt reduction and social programs, vacuum be damned.   If Canada or other "western" countries don't like that, they can step up to the plate with their own blood and treasure.     I suspect this is an underlying fear of many Trump haters...if somebody like Warren wins, then U.S. isolationism could be far worse.   They want Trump to "fight China" too.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 Trump and other presidents have already made identical NATO deadbeat policy speeches.

Talk is cheap, where is the action?  Trump hasn't forced Canada to do jack all.  He could, I wouldn't care i think we should upgrade our military a bit and have more defense sovereignty.  I'd agree with Trump and you if i were an American, the US spends a lot of dough on defense and others not much.  But don't expect any country to turn down the going offer of free protection.

Private US defense companies are big business in just about every congressional district, they suck from the US gov's teet too.  They donate to and lobby congress reps for spending, they get it, the defense industry is subsidized by the US gov and they want a big military, it's good for business.  Military industrial complex.  Defense companies in so many districts means voters want to protect their jobs too, they vote accordingly.

Quote

Nope....the exact opposite.   The Ukraine is where NATO's expansion stops, as it is destabilizing.   Ditto Belarus or Georgia.   Syria has long been a Russian client state.

Russia wins and therefore US loses when Russia annexed Crimea. It doesn't matter where NATO ends it matters who is gaining power.  Zero sum game, new cold war.  South vietnam and south korea weren't a part of NATO nor were a hundred other developing countries the US sought to have in its pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Talk is cheap, where is the action?  Trump hasn't forced Canada to do jack all.  He could, I wouldn't care i think we should upgrade our military a bit and have more defense sovereignty.  I'd agree with Trump and you if i were an American, the US spends a lot of dough on defense and others not much.  But don't expect any country to turn down the going offer of free protection.

 

Trump has already threatened to remove Canada from Five Eyes because of Huawei and 5G, gave permission to Canada to buy clapped out F/A-18s from Australia, and continues to ramp up the pressure with "action" by threatening to retreat from NATO and multilateral cooperation.   Also, no U.S. missile defense for Canadian air space.    Canada has responded to Trump and NATO criticism:

Quote

Canada has announced plans to increase its defence budget by nearly three quarters over the next decade, after coming under pressure from the United States to boost military spending.

Defence minister Harjit Sajjan said the budget would jump by 73% to C$32.7bn ($24.2bn) in 2026-27 from C$18.9bn in 2016-17, with the biggest increases coming in later years.

Sajjan’s announcement came a day after Liberal foreign minister Chrystia Freeland said Canada would have to play a larger global role as the administration of Donald Trump retreated from multilateralism.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/07/canada-increase-military-spending-nato

 

Quote

Private US defense companies are big business in just about every congressional district, they suck from the US gov's teet too.  They donate to and lobby congress reps for spending, they get it, the defense industry is subsidized by the US gov and they want a big military, it's good for business.  Military industrial complex.  Defense companies in so many districts means voters want to protect their jobs too, they vote accordingly.

 

Do you think Canada has no such industry and interests ?    U.S. spending as a percentage of GDP is at post WW2 lows (3.5%).   Canadian subcontractors want a big piece of that pie too (e.g. F-35 JSF program).  

 

Quote

Russia wins and therefore US loses when Russia annexed Crimea. It doesn't matter where NATO ends it matters who is gaining power.  Zero sum game, new cold war.  South vietnam and south korea weren't a part of NATO nor were a hundred other developing countries the US sought to have in its pocket

 

So what ?   Americans are not going to die for Ukraine.  If you want to fight Russia over Crimea, give Chrystia Freeland a rifle and send her ass over there.

Canada is obviously less concerned about Russia "winning" than the Americans based on its anemic defense spending.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one bites the dust.....

 

Quote

Kamala Harris is dropping out of the presidential race, she told staff on a call Tuesday.

She will release a video momentarily announcing her plans.

 

.....no money...no shot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin Trudeau is now part of a Joe Biden 2020 campaign ad...no blackface required:

 

 

Biden may be going down the road of Deplorables 2.0, and we know how that ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/no-no-trump-u-s-evacuates-baghdad-embassy-amid-violent-protests-over-air-strikes/amp

Another iraq war on the horizon?  Maybe they'll finally find those wmd's.  :lol:

 

 

I believe they* DID find WMDs...but it was VX nerve agent and its precursors. No nukes or anything yellow cake-like...

* they i this case being ISIS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

I believe they* DID find WMDs...but it was VX nerve agent and its precursors. No nukes or anything yellow cake-like...

* they i this case being ISIS.

 

Sorry but no.  Your boy trump admitted they never had any.  ISIS discovery was a fraud. 

 

Edited by Cannucklehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

ISIS discovery was a fraud. 

 

Says you, anyways. And who are you? A rhetorical question...

Anyways...the media claim that ISIS captured the compound in Muthanna and they found VX precursors + a number of highly degraded sarin filled rockets which they promptly threatened to dump in some water supply. But, since you were there with ISIS and know exactly what went down, I suppose this is just another example of the media lying.

:)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Says you, anyways. And who are you? A rhetorical question...

Anyways...the media claim that ISIS captured the compound in Muthanna and they found VX precursors + a number of highly degraded sarin filled rockets which they promptly threatened to dump in some water supply. But, since you were there with ISIS and know exactly what went down, I suppose this is just another example of the media lying.

:)

 

Or another example of trump lying?  

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cannucklehead said:

Or another example of trump lying?  

:)

 

TDS is a terrible thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cannucklehead said:

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/no-no-trump-u-s-evacuates-baghdad-embassy-amid-violent-protests-over-air-strikes/amp

Another iraq war on the horizon?  Maybe they'll finally find those wmd's.  :lol:

 

I think you mean Iran war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...