[RD] Surrender Summit

[metalhead]

I think all of you at one point or another have expressed the view that Trump is a "Russian agent" or some such.

Can you explain this to me a little? The reality seems to be that Trump is largely continuing the hostile policy of the Obama years, with some evidence that Trump has actually taken a more aggressive stance toward Russia.

His administration has, on occasion, taken expected action against Russia, but it's window dressing.

Putin wants 2 things - repeal of the Magnitsky Act and the weakening or even outright collapse of NATO. The former is going to be a heavy lift until the GOP completes its one party state. The latter has unquestionably happened. Our NATO allies cannot count on us. Trump is so hot and cold towards them that we have become completely unreliable. This may not specifically be a result of him taking direction from anyone, but the frayed relationships between us and our allies is undeniably in Russia's interest.

I think Trump is naturally disposed to Russia's view of the world, and they have been cultivating that in him for 30+ years. I don't think he's a knowing agent of the Russian government, but I do think he is legitimately worried that they have evidence of extensive financial crimes to hold over his head, and when push comes to shove such as when Trump appears on stage with Putin, Trump will be inclined towards deference or even subservience to Russia.

 

[Sommerswerd]

@Gori the Grey @metalhead @Cutlass @Sommerswerd I think all of you at one point or another have expressed the view that Trump is a "Russian agent" or some such. Can you explain this to me a little? The reality seems to be that Trump is largely continuing the hostile policy of the Obama years, with some evidence that Trump has actually taken a more aggressive stance toward Russia. Most of the arguments for Trump being a Manchurian candidate seem to revolve around aesthetics - he won't condemn this, he won't "take a strong stand" on that, he was insufficiently hostile to Putin when they met, he threw the intelligence services under the bus with the stupid crap he said. About the only substantive thing I can find where the administration did something that was pro-Russia was the reported foot-dragging on the round of sanctions passed early in Trump's presidency that were retaliation for Russia's interference in the election. So, when it is claimed that Trump is some kind of puppet of Putin, what exactly is meant by it?

Well I think I've characterized Trump as an "asset" of Putin, as opposed to a "Russian agent"... Also, I think I've said this before, but again... calling Trump a "Manchurian Candidate" lets him off the hook way too much, as the "real" Manchurian Candidate involved a man who was acting against his will, without his actual knowledge of what he was doing, because of someextreme brainwashing/metal conditioning he was subjected to. Trump is doing what he wants, for his own benefit.

 

[Zkribbler]

Congress-mandated sanctions for the UK nerve-agent death kicked in today. Fox News immediately began patting Trump on the back because of "his willingness" to sanction Russian.

 

[Lexicus]

His administration has, on occasion, taken expected action against Russia, but it's window dressing.

I posted a list of things he's done, and I would like a specific explanation of why they are "window dressing." To me right now it seems like his supposed fealty to Putin largely consists of actions that can be described as "window dressing."

I think Trump is naturally disposed to Russia's view of the world, and they have been cultivating that in him for 30+ years. I don't think he's a knowing agent of the Russian government, but I do think he is legitimately worried that they have evidence of extensive financial crimes to hold over his head, and when push comes to shove such as when Trump appears on stage with Putin, Trump will be inclined towards deference or even subservience to Russia.

Given how Putin operates, I think it's actually likely that Trump is or was at some point operating under threat of murder rather than blackmail (a theory that @Timsup2nothin has mentioned in the past, iirc). Manafort's actions can also be explained by the theory that he is afraid of being murdered, though of course we don't know enough to say one way or the other.

Well I think I've characterized Trump as an "asset" of Putin, as opposed to a "Russian agent"... Also, I think I've said this before, but again... calling Trump a "Manchurian Candidate" lets him off the hook way too much, as the "real" Manchurian Candidate involved a man who was acting against his will, without his actual knowledge of what he was doing, because of someextreme brainwashing/metal conditioning he was subjected to. Trump is doing what he wants, for his own benefit.

I agree with the bold, and I agree that he can be characterized as an asset of Putin rather than an agent.

As both of you probably know I am of the opinion that Trump is largely a homegrown American phenomenon and that the Russians can't really be blamed for forcing him on us. The Russians don't present an existential threat to democracy in the US: our own organized business class is where the threat comes from.

 

[innonimatu]

I think Trump is naturally disposed to Russia's view of the world, and they have been cultivating that in him for 30+ years. I don't think he's a knowing agent of the Russian government, but I do think he is legitimately worried that they have evidence of extensive financial crimes to hold over his head, and when push comes to shove such as when Trump appears on stage with Putin, Trump will be inclined towards deference or even subservience to Russia.

The insanity is strong in the anti-Trump camp!

Please tell me, what was "the russian view of the world" 30 years ago? That would be 1987. Russia was part of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact still existed, and the US had no notable presence in the Middle East. The strategic situation of the world was completely different. Putin was probably busy stalking some german...

Perhaps you meant 20 years ago? Those were Yeltsin years in Russia. Russia had a president that had been place in power there after blatant, admitted, election interference by the US. Said president you go on to appoint your chosen nemesis Putin to succeed him. In 1997 Russia was still trying, without success, to join the "western club", eventually even the EU and NATO. Putin was trying to move from a failed local politics career to one in Moscow.
After that they had instead the doors slammed on their faces, an armed insurrection financed by US allies in the caucasus, and would go on to see NATO bomb rump Yugoslavia to pieces.

Your conspiracy theory fails the history test. Or does part of the conspiracy feature some other dark russian overlord who was in power through all this?

This fixation in the Russia canard as a political winning card will be the undoing of the democrats. But I understand why they do it: that party does not want to change anything, and the real popular way to oppose Trump was advocating economic changes. They can't do it, too many people sold out inside.

 

[Lexicus]

This fixation in the Russia canard as a political winning card will be the undoing of the democrats. But I understand why they do it: that party does not want to change anything, and the real popular way to oppose Trump was advocating economic changes. They can't do it, too many people sold out inside.

The idea that the Democrats are focusing on Russia to win elections is generally held by people with little or no exposure to/knowledge of how Democratic candidates are actually campaigning.

A campaign ad for the Democratic candidate for governor of Georgia was posted here recently; it discussed expanding access to health care and education and iirc didn't mention Russia or even Trump at all.

 

[Berzerker]

Trump surrenders to 'chain migration'

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/nyregion/melania-trumps-parents-become-us-citizens.html

Even as his in-laws were going through the process, Mr. Trump was denouncing it. In November, he tweeted, “CHAIN MIGRATION must end now! Some people come in, and they bring their whole family with them, who can be truly evil. NOT ACCEPTABLE!”

Now we know what triggered that outburst, the in laws were moving in

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Moderator Action: Remember that one liners do not an RD thread make. Please stay on topic and have more to say than a one line joke. Thank you.

 

[metalhead]

I posted a list of things he's done, and I would like a specific explanation of why they are "window dressing." To me right now it seems like his supposed fealty to Putin largely consists of actions that can be described as "window dressing."

Because they are ultimately small potatoes compared to causing friction within NATO. Because by denying, still, that Russia is influencing our elections, Trump effectively kneecaps our ability to respond and ensure the integrity of the midterms, or any elections going forward.

Compared to those big fish, what does Putin care about some additional sanctions or some dead mercenaries? He's playing a long game he might end up winning. A little short term pain is acceptable.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Please tell me, what was "the russian view of the world" 30 years ago? That would be 1987. Russia was part of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact still existed, and the US had no notable presence in the Middle East. The strategic situation of the world was completely different. Putin was probably busy stalking some german...

As is so often the case, in supporting your skewed world view you present what can charitably be called "alternative facts." "The US had no notable presence in the Middle East" is just laughably wrong, and while the strategic situation of the world was completely different it's pretty obvious that you are totally clueless regarding how it was different.

Before you talk about something "failing the history test" perhaps you should read some.

 

[Lexicus]

Because they are ultimately small potatoes compared to causing friction within NATO.

I can't help but think that any friction within NATO seems like more a matter of appearances than anything else.

Because by denying, still, that Russia is influencing our elections, Trump effectively kneecaps our ability to respond and ensure the integrity of the midterms, or any elections going forward.

So can you explain what you feel should be done to ensure the integrity of our elections that isn't being done?

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Because they are ultimately small potatoes compared to causing friction within NATO. Because by denying, still, that Russia is influencing our elections, Trump effectively kneecaps our ability to respond and ensure the integrity of the midterms, or any elections going forward.

Compared to those big fish, what does Putin care about some additional sanctions or some dead mercenaries? He's playing a long game he might end up winning. A little short term pain is acceptable.

There is friction within NATO (and have been in the past) without Russian influence: see Turkey. Also this scenario requires lots of faith (which is perhaps admirable) in some obscure and quite improbable conspiration theory. Russia is a huge territory but a dwarf in many other respects. Trump is a problem not as a foreign agent but becouse he is potential danger to powers within US or global interests. Thats all...

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

So can you explain what you feel should be done to ensure the integrity of our elections that isn't being done?

Ban Infowars. Checked.

 

[REDY]

So it seems that Turkey is hit after all:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/10/lir...dogan-tells-turks-they-have-their-dollar.html

It may hurt some EU economy, especcially that antisemitist one. But IMHO its still worthy to hear Erdogan´s crying. Thumbs up for Trump.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

So it seems that Turkey is hit after all:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/10/lir...dogan-tells-turks-they-have-their-dollar.html

Yep. Great time for cheap holidays in Turkey...

 

[metalhead]

I can't help but think that any friction within NATO seems like more a matter of appearances than anything else.

I'm not so sure. Would YOU want to be in the position right now of relying on Donald Trump, for anything? These relationships matter, especially in combating the kinds of incremental gains Putin has been making in the last several years. Trump has explicitly questioned whether it's even worth it to the United States to defend some of the smaller NATO member states. That definitely hurts solidarity within the alliance.

He has been giving clear, albeit at times contradicted, signals that he doesn't really believe in NATO. As its main source of military power, NATO would be toast without us. I don't see what purpose it serves to assume Trump doesn't really mean what he says about it.

So can you explain what you feel should be done to ensure the integrity of our elections that isn't being done?

Sure. A through audit of election systems and results, to identify how deeply Russian agents were able to penetrate elections systems and to see if any votes were changed. Something on the order of the 9/11 Commission would have been a sensible response given just what is known publicly about the breadth of the hacking. Large federal grants to all 50 states to beef up cybersecurity around all elections infrastructure, if not an outright payoff to the states to go back to paper balloting.

Now granted, the Senate and FBI both appear to be doing credible investigations on these issues, but nobody really knows if our systems have been upgraded to prevent future hacks. And Trump sure as hell seems totally disinterested in doing anything about it.

 

[Farm Boy]

ensure the integrity of the midterms, or any elections going forward.

The elephant looms on the horizon.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm not so sure. Would YOU want to be in the position right now of relying on Donald Trump, for anything?

Of course not, but the American state is rather more than "Donald Trump" and most of the crazy things Donald has said are contradicted shortly afterwards by his advisors going "yeah actually no"

Sure. A through audit of election systems and results, to identify how deeply Russian agents were able to penetrate elections systems and to see if any votes were changed. Something on the order of the 9/11 Commission would have been a sensible response given just what is known publicly about the breadth of the hacking. Large federal grants to all 50 states to beef up cybersecurity around all elections infrastructure, if not an outright payoff to the states to go back to paper balloting.

Now granted, the Senate and FBI both appear to be doing credible investigations on these issues, but nobody really knows if our systems have been upgraded to prevent future hacks. And Trump sure as hell seems totally disinterested in doing anything about it.

https://www.eac.gov/news/2018/07/16...es-and-territories-have-requested-hava-funds/
Read that and tell me what you think. And note that I looked up Thomas Hicks to make sure this wasn't some sort of Trump-approved PR thing; he was appointed by Obama.

 

[metalhead]

It's not nothing, but keep in mind that Trump has been receiving briefings about Russians hacking the election since 3 months before he was elected. Nearly 2 years later they come through with some funds? Should have happened 18 months ago, if they were actually going to be put to uses that could protect the 2018 elections.

Government just does not move fast enough to put money allocated in June 2018 to use to properly protect an election scheduled for less than 5 months later. I don't doubt there are administration officials sincerely interested in protecting our elections from foreign interference. But a normal president would have prioritized it and done something about it immediately. This is something they waited on until it was too late to help.

 

[Hrothbern]

So it seems that Turkey is hit after all:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/10/lir...dogan-tells-turks-they-have-their-dollar.html

It may hurt some EU economy, especcially that antisemitist one. But IMHO its still worthy to hear Erdogan´s crying. Thumbs up for Trump.

The tricky thing is the positive feedback between the Lira weakening and the size of the national debt in unhedged foreign currencies. Share debt in foreign currencies estimated at 40%.
If unhedged (likely) this means that for every 10% the Lira goes down to a foreign currency, the debt increases with 4%.
This year so far the Lira to USD went down 50%.

EU will be affected to some degree:
Amount owned by EU-zone banks: Spain USD 80 Billion, France USD 40 Billion, Italy USD 20 Billion.

Too bad this "pastor" issue and the retalliation did not get hot earlier, and too bad that Erdogan was clever enough to hold snap elections to have his seat secured before the imo inevitable strong dip of the Turkish economy, as posted in some earlier posts.

But considering that 60% of the arms import of Turkey over 2013-2017 was coming from the US, around 5% of the total arms export of the US.... good business for the US.... the still strategic significance of the geographic location of Turkey for the US..... my first guess is still that it will all be a temporary conflict with Trump.