The party of Reagan is dead folks! Final nail in the coffin!
The party of Reagan is dead folks! Final nail in the coffin!I'm fine with that. I'm also fine if Russia invades a country that doesn't bother to spend it's 2% on its own defense, waiting to take our good sweet time to come to their defense so when they are liberated there's little left of their country once the Russians get done plundering it.
Yeah, I'm at the point where it only seems logical to expect the absolute worst from the toddling American dicktator.What it is, is a colossal dickhead fucking over the established world order for some reason. This reason is perplexing. Does dickhead think china is going to back down? This is a country that has over a long period of time told everyone else to go and fuck themselves.
To the point that they have essentially seized a major shipping way and deployed military assets to control it. In other words it will require major military action to dislodge them and a positive outcome from a western perspective is far from guaranteed. The thing is dickhead has some legitimate complaints about the reds but that is what the world trade organization is for. Weird times that we live in.
Dude you've turned real bitter over the last couple of months. I guess thats the Trump effect, he effectively forces everyone to take a side, to take a stand.. Radicalization on both sides. For better and for worse.
I would disagree with bitter, but I am fed up with a clear and present danger being taken as "oh that's just Trump". I would bet you real money that if Putin annexed more countries, including NATO members, that Trump would not honor our treaties with you. That's an extraordinary statement perhaps but I've been aware of the good, the bad, and the ugly of US foreign policy and have never, ever seen the likes of this. I would dare say that's true going back to 1776.
We are not the nation we were just twenty years ago.
I agree with this and it's pretty scary. I suspect if Russia just up and declared war and ran some tanks across the border the US would probably (PROBABLY!!) be compelled to respond. If he pulled another Ukraine with the 'little green men'? I have my doubts the US would do anything. Trump would just say 'we don't know what's going on over there' and leave it at that.
It's amazing how much damage he's been able to do to our country in about 18 months and almost all of it was foreseeable.
I agree, and IMO voting with the electoral college undermines freedom along with the tricks to eliminate certain populations and gerrymandering. I feel far from free, and more like manipulated.Assholeness is subjective... In my opinion it is all about freedom. The second your vote doesnt count for anything at the ballots anymore thats the second it is game over. You've got incoming.
I agree, and IMO voting with the electoral college undermines freedom along with the tricks to eliminate certain populations and gerrymandering. I feel far from free, and more like manipulated.
In 2000 the remedy for the electoral closeness looked and was a partisan process. Freedom is free until greed for power gets in the way IMO.
You're a piece of human filth!I'm fine with that. I'm also fine if Russia invades a country that doesn't bother to spend it's 2% on its own defense, waiting to take our good sweet time to come to their defense so when they are liberated there's little left of their country once the Russians get done plundering it.
This is nonsense. Trade deficits are not necessarily good or bad and in our case a trade deficit is probably a good thing. (it has led to massive foreign investment in the US, which is great for us.) Regardless of this our trade deficits have nothing to do with the wisdom or lack thereof of having bases in Europe. We are also not even remotely spending $100 billion a year on the defense of Europe. (out of a total of ~1.1 million US service members 65,000 are in Europe, about 6%.)
In the end the US has bases in Europe because we want bases in Europe to project power from, not because we are being nice guys and subsidizing Europe's defense. They will likely increase their own defense spending but it will be at the expense (har) of US influence because they will be moving to a phase where a US partnership is less desirable. While Trump may pull our troops from Europe there's also a decent chance Europe will just request that they leave anyway. (Germany's population wants US troops out, after all).
Regardless, Europe won't be giving in to Trump's demands. Primarily because Trump's demands are nonsensical and can't actually be met because they aren't real and secondly because you have to remember that the US has basically no leverage anymore because we can't make credible commitments. Nobody trusts Trump to stick by any agreement they make.
I’d like to think in the first event Congress would finally regain their power to declare war and Trump would be forced to do something not so sure about scenario two...
It is not non-sense. It is no longer economically viable for America to bolster the defense of Europe given the current economic relationship.
Great Britain learned this first hand after they lost the American colonies. They realized they could enjoy all of the economic benefits without having to pay for the cost to defend these lands. Now, the regular base operating costs are a drop in the bucket for America, but when you factor in the long term R&D, weapons and equipment costs, and defensive systems, it's much higher. After all, bases mean nothing if you don't have stuff there.
You also can't forget the operating, training, and munitions costs the US Navy absorbs by patrolling the Atlantic and Mediterranean, not to mention the actual cost of the ships themselves. Don't you realize that the US military doesn't have to be as big if it weren't stationed in Europe? This global presence does not come cheap, and costs hundreds of billions of dollars each year.
And no, I'm not advocating for an immediate pull out of Europe and an immediate downsizing of our military. All I'm trying to do is put the real costs of operating in such a geopolitical fashion. The US cannot continue to afford its massive, global military dominance along with its other problems it must tackle: Infrastructure, rising obligatory health care costs, global warming impact, deforestation and soil deprivation, and social security. We've been funding this stuff off debt, and our debt to GDP levels have tripled since 1980. It's unsustainable with some form of renegotiation. The last time it was this high was at the end of WW2.
As for attracting foreign investment, I'll give you that, but only indirectly. War is the fastest way to throw away economic progress, and maintaining peace is fantastic for prosperity. America has always been an attractive place for foreign investment, and its economic might makes it even more attractive. The internet, actually, has been a phenomenal tool for foreign investment, because it allows for greater transparency and up-to-date statistics on a company's performance.
That 2% is mandatory? Who is sayin that? You? Your president? We must obey without hesitation?. NO.I'm fine with that. I'm also fine if Russia invades a country that doesn't bother to spend it's 2% on its own defense, waiting to take our good sweet time to come to their defense so when they are liberated there's little left of their country once the Russians get done plundering it.
The idea that you would spend less on the military if Europe, Russia and China suddenly started building up their military seems naive in the extreme!It is not non-sense. It is no longer economically viable for America to bolster the defense of Europe given the current economic relationship. Great Britain learned this first hand after they lost the American colonies. They realized they could enjoy all of the economic benefits without having to pay for the cost to defend these lands. Now, the regular base operating costs are a drop in the bucket for America, but when you factor in the long term R&D, weapons and equipment costs, and defensive systems, it's much higher. After all, bases mean nothing if you don't have stuff there. You also can't forget the operating, training, and munitions costs the US Navy absorbs by patrolling the Atlantic and Mediterranean, not to mention the actual cost of the ships themselves. Don't you realize that the US military doesn't have to be as big if it weren't stationed in Europe? This global presence does not come cheap, and costs hundreds of billions of dollars each year.
And no, I'm not advocating for an immediate pull out of Europe and an immediate downsizing of our military. All I'm trying to do is put the real costs of operating in such a geopolitical fashion. The US cannot continue to afford its massive, global military dominance along with its other problems it must tackle: Infrastructure, rising obligatory health care costs, global warming impact, deforestation and soil deprivation, and social security. We've been funding this stuff off debt, and our debt to GDP levels have tripled since 1980. It's unsustainable with some form of renegotiation. The last time it was this high was at the end of WW2.
As for attracting foreign investment, I'll give you that, but only indirectly. War is the fastest way to throw away economic progress, and maintaining peace is fantastic for prosperity. America has always been an attractive place for foreign investment, and its economic might makes it even more attractive. The internet, actually, has been a phenomenal tool for foreign investment, because it allows for greater transparency and up-to-date statistics on a company's performance.