1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Has the US government been this unstable in the past 40 years?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Estebonrober, Dec 20, 2018.

  1. Takhisis

    Takhisis is it fall yet

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    43,752
    Location:
    up yours!
    Yyyyes and no. The US is breaking commitments left and right. Whether those were good and bad commitments is another thing, of course, but from outside everybody is thinking ‘how are they going to betray us next?’
    But now those rebels, proxies and so on are being hung out to dry. The reputation of the U.S. will suffer because of this. *spreads hands helplessly*
    I am so going to misquote this.

    @Timsup2nothin
    I didn't know you were renting out posting space to Rudy Giuliani.
    Hmmm. I'll point out that you are mistaking somebody who cunningly exploits a broken system for somebody truly intelligent. It's like those topscorers who play for powerful clubs and are allowed to score with their hands or from offside positions (i.e. Messi and CR<insertnumberhere>) and then get acclaimed as flawlessly talented gods of football.

    Also, he's not surviving. Two years might seem like a lot due to the lightning-speed communications of our day and age, but it's not that much.
    Now, you say that he's not any more racist than the average (U.S.) citizen, which might just be true, but only if you know the difference between average and median.

    On other respects I agree. I live in a country that endured twelve and a half years of Trump-like madness and, well, anybody compared to the former delusional rulers will look better, but better isn't the same as best.
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  2. tetley

    tetley Head tea leaf

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    2,930
    Location:
    Igloovik
  3. Commodore

    Commodore Technology of Peace

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,621
    Location:
    The Tiberium Future
    I'm sorry, but exactly what treaty or formal agreement is the US violating by no longer committing forces to the Syrian civil war? The answer is none, therefore there has been no "betrayal" on the part of the US. This is just the rest of the world throwing a toddler-like tantrum because for once the US is refusing to fight everyone else's battles for them. If you Europeans are sooooo concerned about the situation in Syria, then why don't you send your sons and daughters to go die for them? I, for one, am tired of seeing our government sacrifice the lives of our soldiers for supposed "allies" that don't even appreciate that sacrifice.

    Also, a small detail that everyone seems to be missing is that Trump did not say the US would halt all military action in Syria, just that any ground forces we have will be pulled out. Air strikes will still continue though. Basically, Trump is saying we are still going to help, we just aren't going to put any American lives in danger while we do it. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that stance. I mean, why should Americans die for Syrians?

    Except we aren't hanging them out to dry. We agreed to arm and fund them, not fight the war for them. The fact that we actually decided to commit any troops at all should be seen as extremely generous.
     
  4. Berzerker

    Berzerker Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,019
    Location:
    the golf course
    apparently we're maintaining our forces in Iraq and those are probably focused on the NW where the Kurds are located... I dont know if its a good idea to carve up NE Syria to expand Kurdish conquests in this war, the fewer cross tribal intrusions the better to calm the situation
     
  5. Kaitzilla

    Kaitzilla Lord Croissant

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2008
    Messages:
    8,337
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    America!
    Has there ever been a government shutdown before with 1 party controlling the House, Senate, and Presidency?

    Also, remember to vote for James Mattis for President.

    Mad Dog 2020
     
  6. Berzerker

    Berzerker Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,019
    Location:
    the golf course
    it happened several times under Carter
     
  7. Commodore

    Commodore Technology of Peace

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,621
    Location:
    The Tiberium Future
    Every time there is a government shutdown it reminds me of my idea for an amendment to the Constitution that would require Congress to pass a budget before a shutdown must occur or all 100 senators and all 435 representatives would be required to resign their seats and emergency elections held to refill them.

    Pass an amendment like that and I guarantee you'd never see another government shutdown again.

    EDIT: The amendment would also state that the president must sign any budget approved by Congress or must resign if he decides to veto it.

    EDIT2: And in case it wasn't clear, the amendment would also bar any senator or representative that was forced to resign for not passing a budget from ever running for reelection to Congress again.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2018
  8. Takhisis

    Takhisis is it fall yet

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    43,752
    Location:
    up yours!
    *sigh* I assume that asking the US to pay Iraq war reparations would be too much.
    This so reminds me of Nixon's sucessful strategy for the Viet Nam war.
    The Turks are already demanding that the US retake its arms from the Kurds in Syria and, seeing how the US screwed the Kurds in Iraq only last year, I strongly suspect that the Donald simply has never had any four-letter words to give.
     
  9. Old Hippy

    Old Hippy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,407
    I like your idea but will just mention you still have to deal with any amendments included in the budget... who gets to veto any shonky 'pork barreling' and who would decide what is 'pork barreling'
     
  10. Ajidica

    Ajidica High Quality Person

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Messages:
    19,067
    Let's extend the question, why should Americans conduct airstrikes in Syria?
    The Syrian Arab Republic certainly didn't ask us to conduct airstrikes, Congress never authorized the President (Obama or Trump) to conduct airstrikes, and neither the UNSCR (as far as I am aware) nor Congress authorized the United States to conduct airstrikes against uniformed Syrian personnel.
    The United States has been championing airstrikes inside Syria to what end? Without cooperation from Syrian ground forces they devolve into a sordid and bloody farce analogous to the Vietnam body count trackers. While we cooperate with the Kurds, the more we help the Kurds the greater chance of kicking off another, even greater, regional conflagration as the one the Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Iran can agree on is that none of them want a Kurdish state. If the establishment of a Kurdish state and likely encouraging several more decades of regional conflagration like 'Africa's World War' which is still lurching along, then that is something which should be discussed instead of the US sleepwalking to as a result of myopic and asinine proxy war policies dredged up from some Cold Warrior's fever dream.

    One man's pork is another's regional economic development. The bridges built across the Mississippi in the Twin Cities to the south were largely built with federal money. Were they pork or regional economic development?
     
  11. Old Hippy

    Old Hippy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,407
    Here in Australia we would say they were infrastructure spending that was spent in a marginal electorate seat to favour the government that spent the money
    In the Twin Cities example they were passed into the budget, so at one time a president decided that question... that they were not pork but were regional development (most likely) unless the swamp is that corrupt that they decided they were pork.... like in the Australian example
     
  12. Ajidica

    Ajidica High Quality Person

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Messages:
    19,067
    Well, that's a non-response if I've ever seen one.
    "They were pork, unless they were not, but then of course they could have been."
     
  13. Old Hippy

    Old Hippy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,407
    we are talking about politicians promises...its appropriate
     
  14. Colonel

    Colonel Sandbox

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,151
    Location:
    Back in the Good Ole USA
    The house is burning and we are arguing over how it was set on fire. Secretary Mattis resigning is a frightening development and will surely lead to disaster .
     
  15. Takhisis

    Takhisis is it fall yet

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    43,752
    Location:
    up yours!
    Hey, Commodore, I'll add in another example of earlier US pullouts, in this case a non-military one. Back in the late 80s and early 90s the US went about South America offering huuuge loans in exchange for the recipients' destroying their local economic infrastructure and societal ties, with the usual bribes to the appropriate officials. Then, after having ensured that the system depended on ever-increased periodic injections of foreign funding, around 2001 they decided to make an example of those countries, refused any further funding, and triggered a massive regional crisis. In its wake came scum like the self-proclaimed Bolivarian governments and others.

    Nowadays in the middle east you have a structure in which the US' presence is necessary by its own actions and now you're bailing. It is a bit of an impossible situation, yes, and a lot of harm will come out of it whatever you do, but this way you're maximising the damage.
     
  16. Commodore

    Commodore Technology of Peace

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,621
    Location:
    The Tiberium Future
    They can demand all they want, doesn't mean we are going to comply. Hell, we don't even take our own arms back from warzones, so why would we waste the effort in trying to forcibly take arms away from the Kurds?

    Necessary for who? Certainly not for the US. Quite frankly, we could leave that entire region to burn and most Americans wouldn't even think twice about it.

    Maximizing the damage for who? Certainly not the US. You have to remember that under Trump, our official foreign policy is "America First". That means our actions are going to be guided by whatever limits damage to American lives and interests, regardless of how much damage it may cause to others. And we are slowly but surely getting ourselves out of the business of putting our soldiers at risk for a bunch of foreigners who can't even be bothered to defend themselves.

    Funny though however since the end of the Cold War the entire world has been screeching that the US needs to stop acting like the global police and like we own the world, yet now that we are actually starting to do that the world is now screeching about how we are turning our backs on them. Personally, I hope we continue to turn a deaf ear to the rest of the world. You want help? Go ask China or Russia.
     
    Old Hippy and Kaitzilla like this.
  17. innonimatu

    innonimatu Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,016
    It took him some years but he finally had the good sense to start the process of exiting. Vietnam has done zero harm to the US since it withdrew from the country. What greater success can you ask for?

    Your political dislike for some people leads you to claim irrational things in an attempt to tar them. Attack them for the wrong they did (say, Nixon for delaying that peace for a while), not for the right things they did.

    The world is not. Those groups who got in power under the present structure and want stability (remain on top) in their countries and who have a great deal of control over mass media, are. They fear to face their own people without american protection. Not necessarily military, but also the propaganda cover that the "american empire" grants: allegedly having to align with the wishes of the foreign big power lets leaders get away with many abuses. That is the real reason for the hysteria every time an US government moves towards less interventionism.
     
    EnglishEdward likes this.
  18. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Entangled Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,118
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    He could have started earlier.
     
  19. EnglishEdward

    EnglishEdward Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Messages:
    3,352
    Location:
    England
    Donald Trump was a sort of business man, and the questions a business man might ask are::

    Q1: What are the current benefits (ROI) of having the US Army remain there on the ground in Syria?

    Q2: What are the opportunities of having the US Army remain there on the ground in Syria?

    Q3: What are the costs of having the US Army remain there on the ground in Syria?

    Q4: What are the risks of having the US Army remain there on the ground in Syria?

    If he concludes there is little benefit for the costs and risks incurred,
    then why should he not order their withdrawal.

    The way I (and I think Donald Trump) sees it, if Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wants them
    there supporting their feud with Iran; the KSA need to get out its cheque book.
     
  20. Phrossack

    Phrossack Armored Fish and Armored Men

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,679
    Yeah, he deliberately sabotaged the peace talks the first time around for political gain, then continued the war for several very bloody more years. That is entirely his fault, and not just big bad Democrats who only hate him for being a Republican.
     
    Berzerker and hobbsyoyo like this.

Share This Page