A general thread to discuss Trump

[red devil]

O.M.G... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39186644

[steveo]

Don't pause for breath girl. She's learned that technique from her 'Pastor.' He's never lied to her either

[red devil]

Yep, it's the blind faith that's scary...

[JoeLeg]

It's like that Nick Cohen article where he describes how the real danger is those who believe what he says no matter what, and decry anything which disagrees with their point of view as 'fake news', 'lies' or simply irrelevant.

America is drawing itself some very dangerous lines in the sand.

[steveo]

Trump, apparently, believes whoever was the last person in his room

[Loz]

A theatre in America re-enacted the Trump/Clinton debates, but with the gender roles reversed. Interesting...

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2017/march/trump-clinton-debates-gender-reversal.html

[Otta]

People like this would have voted Trump, and will be applauding everything he's doing. There are quite a few of them in parts of America. Scary place (in parts).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p049v0dm

[jaywalker]

Trump is an illusion, or better a mirage floating on the desert in view. It is the Republican majority we need to be scared of. They (not he) have God on their side. And it is they, I fear, that will do the legislating.

Trump is an innocent: that is the secret of his success (as Dostoevsky noted so penetratingly). He actually believes everything as he slides from one moment to another (no matter the idiocy as each inconsistent belief is as good as the next, and can thus be as truly felt).

[Earl Aelfheah]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> O.M.G...

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39186644

Just watched this. 😳

[intexasatthe moment]

Opened the link but sorry ,can't bear to watch .

[Loz]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> People like this would have voted Trump, and will

> be applauding everything he's doing. There are

> quite a few of them in parts of America. Scary

> place (in parts).

>

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p049v0dm

But people like this have always existed. What Trump did was convince working class America that he was their saviour. And unless the Democrats start pulling their finger out to win them back, we will be in serious danger of a second term for Trump.

[JoeLeg]

This is very true. It's all in the mid-terms. If the Dem's do well, Trump is finished; the GOP will have a quiet word with him.

If they fail, and the Republicans still hold the House and Senate, they'll keep him for another term. They don't have any qualms about pulling the rug out from under Trump is they think he's threatening their future chances. But nor do they mind tolerating him so long as they get what they want.

He's keeping the seat warm for Pence, one way or another. The GOP see him as an anomaly, a lesson to be learned for the future.

[JohnL]

Trumps had a conversion on the road to Damascus

Bannons gone, Trump says what happened in Syria was an affront to humanity and insinuates he blames Russia.

Alt Rights on twitter saying he's gone NeoCon

[Seabag]

He's also firing missiles at airbases, they'll love that.

[JohnL]

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> He's also firing missiles at airbases, they'll

> love that.

My, At this rate, Road to Damascus won't be just an idiom

[JoeLeg]

I'm only amazed that it took such little time for the political establishment in Americacto swallow him up, I thought he'd hold out longer.

The spluttering fury of the alt-right really is something to behold though!

[Alan Medic]

Do people agree or disagree with Trump's decision to fire at a Syrian air base? I don't know if it's just going to lead to a more unstable world or if it could actually do some good. Either way, with Trump in charge it's all a bit scary.

[JoeLeg]

With Russia backing them I think it was a foolish move. Any losses can be made good by Russia, and the idea that Assad is deploying nerve gas without the tacit support of Putin is laughable; Putin is plainly ok with it.

It's a direct challenge to Russia in the region, and shows that the Defence Secretary and National Security Advisor have been able to advance their viewpoint to the detriment (obviously) of Bannon et al. In other words the alt-right party is over and 'normal service' has resumed.

I don't think poking Russia with a stick is a good idea, but then it's the first use of chemical weapons since Trump took office and he plainly thinks he needs to respond. I think this was too much.

[????]

If Obhama's Foreign Policy hadn't been so ineffectual and Ed Milliband hadn't been involved in a shameful episode of political opportunism, I feel things would have been far better in Syria and far fewer lives lost

[????]

But bombing that airstrips dropping chemicals on babies & kids - I'm supportive.

[JoeLeg]

I don't have a problem with the act of bombing the airfields per se. My concern is the escalation of force in the face of such trenchant Russian support for Assad. Turkey and Russia patched it up pretty quick when they shot at each other; I'm not convinced the same would happen if US forces got it wrong and killed Russian servicemen. To say nothing of the fact that it rackets up tension regardless.

I don't think nothing should've been done, I think air strikes etc should've been done a long time ago and Russia ha its feet firmly under the table in Damascus now.

[????]

yes and that time was when Labour didn't support it for a 'political' victory - no wonder the new darling of Twitter, Ed Milliband, hasn't made any comment on this

[JoeLeg]

I think at that time there wasn't as much support in the country for more foreign adventures. Plus some were starting to ask who or what would fill the vacuum if Assad left. Certainly Lybia and Eygpt were not seem as resounding successes. Tory MP's had their reservations too.

If we were going to hit Assad it should've been at the start, hard. That time has passed and with it our ability to influence the future of Syria. I have no trouble pulverising those responsible for what happened, I just don't think in the grand scheme it will help.

[jaywalker]

In purely game-theoretic terms (please read this literally) Trump is acting with some acuity. He has become unpredictable. Putin and Xi will have taken note. See endless poker simulations where programmes win against their stupid (even though world-ranked) human 'interpreters' by defying interpretation.

I believe this is current orthodoxy in game-theory terms.

(PS, probably N Korea (though certainly neither Russia nor China) is too stupid to realise - we might fear this, really quite a lot).

[rendelharris]

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think at that time there wasn't as much support

> in the country for more foreign adventures. Plus

> some were starting to ask who or what would fill

> the vacuum if Assad left. Certainly Lybia and

> Eygpt were not seem as resounding successes. Tory

> MP's had their reservations too.

>

> If we were going to hit Assad it should've been at

> the start, hard. That time has passed and with it

> our ability to influence the future of Syria. I

> have no trouble pulverising those responsible for

> what happened, I just don't think in the grand

> scheme it will help.

Sense as ever Joe. Nobody who saw the pictures of the gassed children could avoid the natural desire to take revenge on the perpetrators. However, this has been going on for years and nothing's been done - Trump's justification for a complete reversal of his avowed policy of non involvement seemed to be that he'd seen pictures of "beautiful babies" being killed. If the President of the USA is going to risk conflict with Russia on the basis that something he's seen on TV has upset him we're in for a bumpy ride. It looks decisive and strong - only a cynic (me) could wonder if he's decided it's time for a distraction from the absolute dog's breakfast of a presidency he's managed so far - but it's no basis for a coherent foreign policy.