1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Surrender Summit II: Putin Invited to Washington

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Quintillus, Jul 19, 2018.

  1. Quintillus

    Quintillus Archiving Civ3 Content Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,148
    Location:
    Columbus
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...6e88ae760d8_story.html?utm_term=.ad119bcfd519

    Seems like a special enough occasion to justify its own thread, given that the Helsinki summit has not settled yet. What a week, right? We've had:

    Monday: "I don't know why it would be Russia"
    Tuesday: "Oops, I meant, I don't know why it wouldn't be Russia"
    Tuesday: "Could be other people also"
    Wednesday: "No" when asked whether Russia was still interfering in the U.S.
    Thursday: Let's invite Putin to Washington!

    And no one knows what was said in Helsinki, either. Sounds an awful lots like collusion if you ask me.
     
    hobbsyoyo and REDY like this.
  2. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,754
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    I'm sure Putin will bring a cigar to the Oval Office for his next private time with his intern.
     
  3. Timsup2nothin

    Timsup2nothin Another drone in the hive mind

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Messages:
    29,839
    Location:
    Banned at 3 safe space for nazis sites
    Wouldn't this be more like "surrender valley"? Things certainly seem to be headed downhill.
     
    hobbsyoyo and Lexicus like this.
  4. Broken_Erika

    Broken_Erika Nothing

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    5,309
    Location:
    Glasgnopolis, Grottland
    Surrender Hole!
     
  5. Berzerker

    Berzerker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    14,320
    Location:
    Topeka, Kansas
    Nixon goes to China and he's a statesman
     
  6. Timsup2nothin

    Timsup2nothin Another drone in the hive mind

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Messages:
    29,839
    Location:
    Banned at 3 safe space for nazis sites
    That's because when he went to China he performed the job of a statesman. Trump met with Putin at the end of the least statesmanlike tour a US president has ever conducted.

    But of course putting forth an absurd false equivalence is exactly what you are known for so things around here are running totally true to form, you scumbag [deleted] troll.

    Moderator Action: Warned for flaming --LM
    Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 20, 2018
  7. Quintillus

    Quintillus Archiving Civ3 Content Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,148
    Location:
    Columbus
    Nixon went to China, but as far as I'm aware China was never suspected of having anything to do with Watergate. Watergate was purely Nixon and his cronies' own corruption, without foreign influence playing a part.
     
  8. Berzerker

    Berzerker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    14,320
    Location:
    Topeka, Kansas
    Were you calling Nixon a statesman back then?
     
  9. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,754
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    Would[n't]
     
  10. Berzerker

    Berzerker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    14,320
    Location:
    Topeka, Kansas
    Nixon interfered with the peace talks to end the Vietnam War so he could get elected and millions died as a result, but he's a statesman for opening up China. If Trump's efforts open up Russia without bloodshed, wont history be more kind to him?
     
  11. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,754
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    That's a pretty big if given Trump's first submission. Maybe he will bring us peace in our time though.
     
  12. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Entangled Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    31,734
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    I was, and I was old enough to vote. Opening China to western influence was a big deal and appropriate.
     
  13. Dachs

    Dachs Lord Baldemort

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    32,101
    Location:
    Thedas
    What would "open up Russia" even mean? American companies do business there. American tourists visit. It's not exactly a Hermit Kingdom.
     
  14. Berzerker

    Berzerker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    14,320
    Location:
    Topeka, Kansas
    According to some of our Russian posters NATO and the west have been encroaching upon Russia's sphere of influence and thats why Putin went into Crimea and Ukraine....and apparently thats why Putin meddled in our election, Trump was preferable to Hillary.

    It means reducing tension so Russia doesn't feel the need to mess with the neighborhood.
     
  15. FriendlyFire

    FriendlyFire Codex WMDicanious

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    17,232
    Location:
    Sydney
    I though Republicans were against "appeasement" ?
    Anyway bonespurs is the greatest president, grater then even Lincoln already. Having won six trade wars, denuclearized North Korea and brought back lots of agricultural jobs

    Sure I can see that perspective, except why is Trump gaslighting all our traditional western allies ? While starting up multiple trade wars at the same time ? While tearing down all US created international institutions design to benefit the US ?
    Dosnt even make sense if the US strategy was Detente with Russia.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2018
  16. Kyriakos

    Kyriakos Alien spiral maker

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    49,880
    Location:
    Thessalonike, The Byzantine Empire
    Mr Putin goes to Washington :mischief:
     
  17. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    49,677
    Location:
    Salisbury Plain
    Our Director of National Intelligence
     
  18. Berzerker

    Berzerker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    14,320
    Location:
    Topeka, Kansas
    1) Because he wants them to shoulder more of the burden 2) To renegotiate trade deals 3) If NATO is a problem for Detente, then it needs redefining
     
  19. FriendlyFire

    FriendlyFire Codex WMDicanious

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    17,232
    Location:
    Sydney
    1) Gas lighting, tarriffs threats and calling allies cheaters is the best strategy to get them to spend more on their military ?
    2) Getting out the TPP and then Starting six trade wars against most of the world at the same time is a smart strategy ? The US can do it alone by itself taking on China ?
    3) So Appeasement, removing sanctions and covering up for Russia is a smart strategy ? while attacking NATO and the WTO and NAFTA ? All created by the US to benefit the US ?
     
  20. Hrothbern

    Hrothbern Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2,536
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    Would be nice to know what arguments Obama used at high level confidentiality about increasing EU defense spending to for example "buddy" Angela Merkel.
    It resulted anyway in 2014 to the agreement to increase defense spending over 10 years time to 2%. Whereby noted that doing that in 5 years or so would simply not be cost effective.
    => his analysis and arguments were taken seriously.

    But as Obama has not yet stated those arguments in public, and I guess will not do in full for the foreseeable future... we can only guess.
    The main argument used by Merkel against Trump was that he was exaggerating the situation, and she said that the EU was clearly supporting peace missions of the UN accross the world.
    NOT hit and run military campaigns leaving a mess, whereby involved top level US generals propose huge amounts of money to "normalise" the economy and stability of a country after the military campaign... and are ignored !
    But doing peace and humanitarian (UN) interventions that can be executed from A to Z.
    Whereby noted that population growth (Africa), religious polarising, climate changes, populist authoritarian leaders on the rise, are all factors increasing the number of conflicts, the amount of human misery.

    I think the position of Obama was much more alligned with the NATO allies for such UN supported actions, with special geopolitical actions for the US on top.
    THIS is where Trump is going a new direction: he does not want the UN as supranational legitimation (and restriction).
     

Share This Page

Ebates: Get Paid to Shop