What would be the point of covering it, or what would be the point of the US doing it?
Trump creates biggest foreign policy &#$@-up possible with just word and no actions.
- Thread starter Cutlass
- Start date
What would be the point of covering it, or what would be the point of the US doing it?
Snerk
Smeghead
Isn't putting off WWIII a good thing?
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
Societies have grown decadent. A good old world war should create enough poverty and suffering to put things back into perspective.
So this is what causes WW3? A completely empty declaration that merely recognizes a decades old reality? Not the genocide, slavery and mass rape also going on in the Middle East?
Really, if that's what motivates a global war, then the world deserves it.
Assuming by "covering" you meant us discussing it then what I meant is what would be the point of the US doing it... as in I am inviting you to "cover it".
Snerk
Smeghead
You know this is a pretty good description of the shots in Sarajevo. The Austrian Habsburgs had been loosing power for a long time. But a highly symbolic act was the spark the barrel of gunpowder needed.
Yeah, another 50 years with conservatives out of power is exactly what is needed. Or, we could just skip that whole killing of many millions of people and all the conservatives could cease to be the problem on their own.
Alright then. Well, my first question was "does Trump have the authority to pull UN funding?" After researching it, apparently he does, and has already done so partially. Earlier in the year (before this whole Jerusalem kerfluffle) Trump pulled the US contribution to the UN Population Fund. Now with this vote, Trump is threatening to pull US financial aid to any country that voted in favor of condemning the US.
The question now is: He has the authority to do it, but will he actually do it? That I don't know. Seems like something he would do, but I have to hope some saner people around him are trying their hardest to talk him off the ledge on this one.
Morelike the headless horseman. He likely is descended from hessians as well ^^
But he isn't what allowed this very dangerous thing to happen, re Israel. He has backing from many democrats as well. The issue is far more serious than just Trump. He seems to have done it in hope - simplistic thinking- of gaining allies from the dems, and it is terrible that doing something so catastrophic will indeed get you allies in the US.
But he isn't what allowed this very dangerous thing to happen, re Israel. He has backing from many democrats as well. The issue is far more serious than just Trump. He seems to have done it in hope - simplistic thinking- of gaining allies from the dems, and it is terrible that doing something so catastrophic will indeed get you allies in the US.
Verbose
Deity
Unfortunately for Israel this is a political conflict, and so winning the military conflict doesn't solve anything.
Mostly it leaves Israel with all the responsibility for what happens next, since they won the war. While at the same time making Israel a hostage to its own military success, since that tends to lead to serious overestimation of what winning the war should get them. Which isn't very much, and certainly not an end to the conflict, it just changes. But Israel can of course chose to continue to act is the conflict was still a military one, and that way ensure it never is resolved. That's part of the freedom winning the war bought them.
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
The longer we wait, the more nuclear winter it will take to cancel out global warming.
8 years of Obama sure have brought peace to the Middle East. Ask Syrians and Lybians, they have nothing but love for Obama.
I certainly agree that Bush II was a major eff-up, but it's not like Obama fixed anything. He actually made things worse and contributed a lot for the creation of some of the greatest humanitarian crisis going on in the region. And while Hilary would have been better than Trump on most areas, the Middle East isn't one.
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
I don't think anyone could do much about the middle east.....
But this is a result of the fact that conservatives have been so politically successful in the US that liberals no longer exist. Neither Obama or Clinton (either of them) are liberal in any meaningful way.
Conservatives have won. Screwups like this is the price we pay for conservatives winning.
Berzerker
Deity
16 years of Clinton and Obama and you blame conservatives?
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,374
He has a point though, doesn't he? Israel has been occupying that land and ruling over the palestinians since 1967.
It is true that it is a political problem, one which causes embarrassments to Israel on the international scene, and divisions within. Unlike the previous war, where jewish militias outright murdered, terrorized and expelled most of the local arab population, the West Bank and Gaza territories were not ethnically cleansed. Here the task of terrorizing and keeping subdues all those unwilling subjects has fallen to the army of Israel, they cannot evade, as a state, the full responsibility of what they are doing. But they have need doing it anyway. And so long as the USA keeps protecting them and remains the big superpower, they will keep doing it. The only cost to Israel is to keep bribing american politicians and controlling american media, lest they get exposed as an apartheid state as despicable as was South Africa's. They have gone even as far as having their pet politicians make it a crime for americans to boycott Israel. Those will happily piss on the constitution of their own country (freedom of expression, what is that?) to satisfy their foreign sponsors, so there seems to be no limit to the extent the US government will keep supporting Israel regardless. And inside Israel an oversized military and intelligence that employs a lot of people will keep the warmongers in power until they crash the economy of the country supporting their wars and occupations. Which won't happen until the US ceases funding those...
So he does have a point, Israel is winning. When the palestinians protest they just shoot them in the face, steal more or their land and force them to either submit or starve to death.
Then again, if the US wouldn't veto the UN sanctions, Israel would soon sort of collapse financially.
I grew up with Bush junior in the White House. It's a nostalgia feeling to know, after Obama, that the US is still the greatest threat to World peace.
In all seriousness, I wonder if this decision was influenced by Bannon. From what I have gathered Bannon thinks of the World in very huntingtonian terms, seeing that the future as a conflict of civilizations. This sort of action surely closes the ranks towards the muslim World. Not that the decision has been taken very well in the west either.
In all seriousness, I wonder if this decision was influenced by Bannon. From what I have gathered Bannon thinks of the World in very huntingtonian terms, seeing that the future as a conflict of civilizations. This sort of action surely closes the ranks towards the muslim World. Not that the decision has been taken very well in the west either.
