Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[ldrews]

Of course we don't -- it's a really hard problem, possibly insoluble.

 

But you're the one who claimed that Trump is addressing it. Unless you're talking about his hawkish rhetoric (e.g. alluding to the atom bombs we dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during a speech in Japan), I haven't seen any indication of this.

 

Do you equate addressing it with solving it?

[hrothgar]

Do you equate addressing it with solving it?

 

No. However, you seem to be claiming that Trump is doing something different and better than Obama.

 

What is it that he is doing?

How is it different?

How will you measure success and failure?

[hrothgar]

FWIW, few quick thoughts of my own regarding the situation in North Korea.

 

First and foremost, I categorically reject any thought that the United States should take military action against North Korea.

 

Back in 2003, the United States launched a preemptive attack against Iraq under the pretense that the Iraqi government was building weapons of mass destruction.

 

1. The US government got it wrong. The Bush administration misrepresented evidence regarding weapons of mass destruction.

2. US military actions lead to the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and destabilized the Middle East to this day

 

There have been a lot of consequences of this action.

 

We wasted trillions of dollars

We killed hundreds of thousands of people

And, last but not least, we destroyed our credibility wen it comes to claiming that we "need" to take preemptive military action

 

Assume for the moment that we attack North Korea and this leads the North Korean regime to annihilate Seoul, killing somewhere between a quarter and half million people.

Even though it was the North Koreans who launched the artillery shells, the US will be blamed because this is a highly likely outcome of our cowboy diplomacy.

 

The US maybe a hyper power, but we can not survive the fallout of killing this many innocent people yet again because we're "afraid".

 

From my own perspective, the best outcome to this situation would be a set of trilateral talks between the United States, China, and South Korea trying to come to an accommodation regarding what the Korean peninsula would look after the collapse of the North Korean regime. I don't know what this would look like... Would there be one Korea or two? Would the US maintain any kind of military presence in South Korea? There's a LOT of stuff to be worked out here.

 

However, once folks have reached an agreement on this front, we might be able to get the Chinese to actually take necessary actions to move things into a good direction.

 

These are the sorts of actions that we need.

 

Not stupid statements about "Little Rocket man"

Not begging / pleading for the Chinese to do something without setting up the preconditions for success

Not threats that we're going to nuke the North Koreans

Not undercutting the State Department

 

Oh yeah, actually appointing an ambassador to South Korea might be a good idea.

[Al_U_Card]

NK and SK, NVn and SVn. Communist vs. Corporate. The profits of war used to be treasure or territory or slaves but now it has become mostly about generating business. Defence contracts. The bigger the military, the bigger the contracts and the greater the impetus for instigating conflict.

 

Since NK has no oil (petro-dollar stability/hegemony is a consideration elsewhere, including Vietnam where offshore oil leases as well as helicopter purchases were in play) but they do have nukes, then they are a magnet for conflict. What kind and to what extent likely depends on what the Mil-Ind complex sees as its requirements. People (and their deaths) are just a means to an end.

[olegru]

I recently signed up for free Stanford online course "The Threat of Nuclear Terrorism" (https://lagunita.stanford.edu/courses/course-v1%3AFSI%2BNuclearTerrorism%2BFall2017/)

Very interesting but extremely sad and scary lectures and discussions.

There were several discussions about NK with no real answer of course, but

 

set of trilateral talks between the United States, China, and South Korea trying to come to an accommodation regarding what the Korean peninsula would look after the collapse of the North Korean regime.

 

seems like the only possible approach to try to solve that problem.

[ldrews]

No. However, you seem to be claiming that Trump is doing something different and better than Obama.

 

What is it that he is doing?

How is it different?

How will you measure success and failure?

 

Well, I don't remember Obama muscling China about it. Or announcing that anyone doing business with North Korea would not be able to do business with the US. Or locating 3 aircraft carriers in the North Korean area. Nor making North Korea, and everyone else, nervous as a prelude to actually negotiating something that might work (although I would not expect North Korea to keep any agreements based on their 25 year history).

 

I would measure success as excellent if North Korea denuclearizes peacefully, success as moderate if force is required, and failure if nothing changes.

 

How about you? How would you measure success. What would you suggest is a better approach? Or are you just taking cheap shots because you have nothing to offer?

[ldrews]

I recently signed up for free Stanford online course "The Threat of Nuclear Terrorism" (https://lagunita.stanford.edu/courses/course-v1%3AFSI%2BNuclearTerrorism%2BFall2017/)

Very interesting but extremely sad and scary lectures and discussions.

There were several discussions about NK with no real answer of course, but

 

 

 

seems like the only possible approach to try to solve that problem.

 

The only problem is that North Korea has failed to keep any of its agreements negotiated during the last 25 years. What makes us think that North Korea will do so in the future?

[olegru]

The only problem is that North Korea has failed to keep any of its agreements negotiated during the last 25 years. What makes us think that North Korea will do so in the future?

The simple fact the NK is not the part of proposed of trilateral talks. :)

[Winstonm]

You have to wonder where some parrots posters get their ideas:

 

on Saturday, Trump tweeted:

 

Presidents and their administrations have been talking to North Korea for 25 years, agreements made and massive amounts of money paid … hasn’t worked, agreements violated before the ink was dry, making fools of U.S. negotiators. Sorry, but only one thing will work!

[hrothgar]

You have to wonder where some parrots posters get their ideas:

 

What I find truly remarkable if Drews is so absolutely convinced that Trump is doing the right thing and represents a radical departure from the Obama administration but is utter incapable of describing what it is that he approves of.

 

its almost as if acting like an idiot on Twitter is the be-all and end-all of foreign policy for Drews.

[hrothgar]

Well, I don't remember Obama muscling China about it. Or announcing that anyone doing business with North Korea would not be able to do business with the US. Or locating 3 aircraft carriers in the North Korean area. Nor making North Korea, and everyone else, nervous as a prelude to actually negotiating something that might work (although I would not expect North Korea to keep any agreements based on their 25 year history).

 

I would measure success as excellent if North Korea denuclearizes peacefully, success as moderate if force is required, and failure if nothing changes.

 

How about you? How would you measure success. What would you suggest is a better approach? Or are you just taking cheap shots because you have nothing to offer?

 

1. In general, the person making the claim is the one who is expect to explain just what the $^()^$ they're talking about.

 

2. I'd posted what I thought that best course of action was a few hours before your last "contribution". Perhaps you should read it

 

3. As for what Trump is doing, you are confusing meaningless statements with real action.

 

Diplomacy does not get conducting in public via inane Tweets.

It would be nice if both you and Trump learned this...

 

I will give you the following: Moving a third aircraft carrier into the Western Pacific is a very real action...

Sadly, I think that this is a prelude to something incredibly stupid.

 

> success as excellent if North Korea denuclearizes peacefully, success as moderate if force is required, and failure if nothing changes

 

What if North Korea is forcibly de-nuclearized but a half million people in South Korea die.

Is this success or failure?

 

(Given that this is the entire reason that no one has taken action against North Korea in the past you'd think that it would feature in your calculations somewhere)

[Winstonm]

What I find truly remarkable if Drews is so absolutely convinced that Trump is doing the right thing and represents a radical departure from the Obama administration but is utter incapable of describing what it is that he approves of.

 

its almost as if acting like an idiot on Twitter is the be-all and end-all of foreign policy for Drews.

 

Yes, and it would be perhaps tolerable if the tweets were at minimum factual but spouting nonsense over the social media is not foreign policy.

[ldrews]

What I find truly remarkable if Drews is so absolutely convinced that Trump is doing the right thing and represents a radical departure from the Obama administration but is utter incapable of describing what it is that he approves of.

 

its almost as if acting like an idiot on Twitter is the be-all and end-all of foreign policy for Drews.

 

What is even more remarkable is hrothgar's inability to read or lack of memory (Alzheimer's?). I have not been shy about my beliefs and positions for well over a year. At this point the only reason for listing them again is give hrothgar and others something to target.

 

IMO Trump is changing the direction of US in ways that I approve of. His personality and food-fights I could do without, but his policies I mostly agree with.

 

Which of Trump's policies do you disagree with?

[hrothgar]

What is even more remarkable is hrothgar's inability to read or lack of memory (Alzheimer's?). I have not been shy about my beliefs and positions for well over a year. At this point the only reason for listing them again is give hrothgar and others something to target.

 

 

Try to follow along Larry

 

I spent the last 4 posts asking specifically to describe which of Trump's policies regarding North Korea you approved off.

And you respond by posting pablum.

 

I am well aware of your general beliefs about Trump, as are the rest of the folks on this list.

 

However, you made very specific claim claim - Trump is doing the right thing with respect to North Korea - and up until recently you were completely incapably of describing what it was that you actually approved of...

 

More recently, you've been a bit more clear...

As stupid as ever.

But a bit more clear.

[ldrews]

Some sample Federal regulations:

 

21 USC §461 & 9 CFR §381.171(d) make it a crime to sell "Turkey Ham" as "Ham Turkey" or with the words "Turkey" and "Ham" in different fonts

7

 

16 USC §551 & 36 CFR §261.16© make it a crime to wash a fish at a faucet if it's not a fish-washing faucet, in a national forest.

 

18 U.S.C. §1857 makes it a federal crime to knowingly let your pig enter a fenced-in area on public land where it might destroy the grass.

 

18 U.S.C. §1657 makes it a federal crime to consult with a known pirate.

 

18 U.S.C. §1865 & 36 C.F.R. §2.15(a)(4) make it a federal crime to let your pet make a noise that scares the wildlife in a national park.

 

40 U.S.C. §8103(b)(4) makes it a federal crime to injure a government-owned lamp.

 

21 USC §333 & 21 CFR §102.39 make it a crime to sell onion rings resembling normal onion rings, but made from diced onion, without saying so

 

18 USC §1382 & 32 CFR §636.28(g)(iv) make it a federal crime to ride a moped into Fort Stewart without wearing long trousers.

 

...

 

There are lots more.

[hrothgar]

Some sample Federal regulations:

 

21 USC §461 & 9 CFR §381.171(d) make it a crime to sell "Turkey Ham" as "Ham Turkey" or with the words "Turkey" and "Ham" in different fonts

7

 

16 USC §551 & 36 CFR §261.16© make it a crime to wash a fish at a faucet if it's not a fish-washing faucet, in a national forest.

 

18 U.S.C. §1857 makes it a federal crime to knowingly let your pig enter a fenced-in area on public land where it might destroy the grass.

 

18 U.S.C. §1657 makes it a federal crime to consult with a known pirate.

 

18 U.S.C. §1865 & 36 C.F.R. §2.15(a)(4) make it a federal crime to let your pet make a noise that scares the wildlife in a national park.

 

40 U.S.C. §8103(b)(4) makes it a federal crime to injure a government-owned lamp.

 

21 USC §333 & 21 CFR §102.39 make it a crime to sell onion rings resembling normal onion rings, but made from diced onion, without saying so

 

18 USC §1382 & 32 CFR §636.28(g)(iv) make it a federal crime to ride a moped into Fort Stewart without wearing long trousers.

 

...

 

There are lots more.

 

Yes.

 

They are all listed on this page by Freedom Works

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/19-ridiculous-federal-criminal-laws-and-regulations

 

Any reason why you feel obliged to plagiarize like this?

 

Do you think that people don't respect you for your "intellect"?

[Winstonm]

Yes.

 

They are all listed on this page by Freedom Works

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/19-ridiculous-federal-criminal-laws-and-regulations

 

Any reason why you feel obliged to plagiarize like this?

 

Do you think that people don't respect you for your "intellect"?

 

I fail to see how removing obsolete statutes threatens North Korea. That was the discussion, wasn't it....North Korea?

[Winstonm]

If Ken Berg is listening, I found this to be of interest as to why there is such difficulty in the two sides finding common ground.

[hrothgar]

I fail to see how removing obsolete statutes threatens North Korea. That was the discussion, wasn't it....North Korea?

 

Maybe Drews doesn't understand that removing statues and statutes are different things?

[Winstonm]

Maybe Drews doesn't understand that removing statues and statutes are different things?

 

Or the difference between a carnival barker and a president.

[ldrews]

Or the difference between a carnival barker and a president.

 

If a carnival barker is elected President, pray tell, what is the difference?

[ldrews]

Since Trump was elected President unemployment has dropped to a 17 year low. http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/03/news/economy/october-jobs-report/index.html

 

Is this bad?

[ldrews]

Since Trump was elected President, GDP has been growing >3% per year based on latest quarters. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/27/first-reading-on-third-quarter-gdp-up-3-point-0-percent-vs-2-point-5-percent-rise-expected.html

 

Is this bad?

[ldrews]

Since Trump was elected President, illegal border crossings have decreased by 40%. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/03/08/homeland-security-boss-illegal-border-crossings-down-40/98935926/

 

Is this bad?

[ldrews]

Since Trump was elected President, Neil Gorsuch was appointed and confirmed to the Supreme Court. From Wikipedia: Gorsuch is a proponent of textualism in statutory interpretation and originalism in interpreting the U.S. Constitution, and is an advocate of natural law jurisprudence.

 

Is this bad?