General US Politics

[The Geek]

Was gonna say something, but then Eclipse posted before me, so how about we start a new topic.

We know Trump doesn't care two licks about climate change, but do you think we could get anywhere by pointing out other issues relating to CO₂ release such as ocean acidification and general air quality? And what about other environmental issues such as pollution and habitat management? Or is that all gonna be thrown aside?

[Phoenix Wright]

looking at the new cabinet, we can probably guess on kissing this pretty planet goodbye.

and i'm serious. this new government is even more clueless on clean energy. that was a tough bar to exceed. and then you've got "scientists" proclaiming that climate change isn't as severe a phenomena as the vast majority of climate scientists view it as, or it's not anthropocentric, or perhaps declaring it doesn't exist at all. the future doesn't look good.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Phoenix Wright

[eclipse]

Life, Frey, I'm going to send you both PMs. While I have a bunch of things to say, this topic isn't the place for it.

As for Trump and climate change, I'm pretty sure he'll ignore the effects, unless they cut into his company's profits.

[Lord Raven]

it's really kind of insane that this is considered a political issue, because at the very least even if you don't believe that global warming has as immediate an impact in climate change as is being reported by many climate change scientists, yes there are other environment impacts that are relevant to the core issue of CO2. Having that said, the lobbyists who advocate against climate change in general are really advocating against CO2 for what amounts to their own corporate interests. They really don't give a shit about this kind of thing because it won't turn a profit.

There's actually another thread on this where many people here talk about this in more detail.

[Tetragrammaton]

Putin is a monster that must be stopped. While he might not be invading other countries, his disgusting, irredeemable invasion of human rights and monsterous treatment of LGBT individuals means he must be stopped at all costs. Same with the Middle East. We need to displace these horrific human rights locations in order to save the people that live there who are being victimized.

What's about Saudi Arabia?

Do you want to do something with them?

[Time the Crestfallen]

Well this thread blew up quickly...

As for Trump and climate change, I'm pretty sure he'll ignore the effects, unless they cut into his company's profits.

Pretty much. Who cares about the eventual consequences, as long as they make lots of profit in the short-term.

[Etrurian emperor]

Correct me if I'm reading this wrong but are you implying that America should not do what is in America's best interests and rather what is in Europe's best interests because of Russia? Just because Europe needs America doesn't necessarily mean that that is in America's best interest. It sounds like you're trying to possibly justify war with Russia.

​And correct this too. Are you suggesting that there might be a Russian invasion of Europe incoming? Because all I'm reading here is fearmongering as if we're all going to be speaking Russian in a decade.

​You do know that all of the populists are gaining power because the EU has massively cocked things up in Europe, correct?

I very much doubt that replacing American dominance over Europe with a Russian one is in the best interest of America. Its weakening their own influence over that of a rival. America and Europe are allies which America may have need of if China keeps rising and if Russia keeps its current aggression up. You'd probably disagree but I think we can safely divorce American interest from the discussion because Trump isn't in the white house to serve those. He's sitting there to serve the interest of Trump, his children and his company.

Its also worth noting that article 5 has only been initiated once by America. When that happened Europe obeyed the call.

There need not be an invasion. The threat of force or economic sanctions may be enough to force Europe into submission for a while. But an invasion is possible, those who say its not are forgetting how no one thought it possible Putin annexed Crimea either. We know Putin is comfortable with invading neighbors and annexing their land. If Putin's jr partner in the white house promises to let him have his way and if the EU isn't capable of stopping Putin then what reason does he have not to invade the Baltic? The goodness of his heart? Respect for international law? Does Russia's current course look like they put those in high esteem.

I don't find the populists gaining power because the EU failed to be very relevant. It changes nothing about the dwarf nations of Europe not being able to stand on their own without it. Dissatisfaction with the establishment isn't a good reason to go for the worst outcome possible.

I'd also argue a lot of the problems facing the EU are also external problems they didn't influence. The refugee crisis for example came to be through problems in the middle east where the EU isn't a player.

[Excellen Browning]

There is no American dominance in Europe.

[Etrurian emperor]

There is no American dominance in Europe.

Dominance sounds negative but it doesn't have to be. Right now Europe is very dependent on America and as a result they tend to go along with America's stance on things. There are also quite a few American troops present within our borders.

[Excellen Browning]

Dominance sounds negative but it doesn't have to be. Right now Europe is very dependent on America and as a result they tend to go along with America's stance on things. There are also quite a few American troops present within our borders.

Europe is not dependent on America for anything other than maybe nuclear defense.

[Tryhard]

As for Trump and climate change, I'm pretty sure he'll ignore the effects, unless they cut into his company's profits.

As he already kinda has.

http://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-acknowledges-climate-change-at-his-irish-golf-course/

also i love how america bombs, starts multiple wars, funds different groups of radical jihadists and fully destabilises the middle east and then wonders why there are so many radicals against the west, refugees trying to escape the region into europe, and decides to blame those refugees and the EU

Edited December 19, 2016 by Tryhard

[Etrurian emperor]

Europe is not dependent on America for anything other than maybe nuclear defense.

And actual defense. Last I checked the amount of tanks the Dutch had were a grand total of zero.

That's why Trumps Russian flirt makes Europeans quite wary. If we didn't think this would leave a big gap the talks about a EU army wouldn't have began again the moment the election ended.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Etrurian emperor

[Excellen Browning]

And actual defense. Last I checked the amount of tanks the Dutch had were a grand total of zero.

That's why Trumps Russian flirt makes Europeans quite wary. If we didn't think this would leave a big gap the talks about a EU army wouldn't have began again the moment the election ended.

Lol no.

You have a serious overestimation of Russian military capabilities if you think it is or (ever really was) a conventional military superpower. Russia is a regional power at best.

[Yojinbo]

The EU is under US control. None of the 'leading' politicians in europe get to make any decision if they're against US interests. Otherwise the EU would have already stopped uselessly sanctionizing Russia long ago, for instance. The CIA has torture prisons in Poland and Romania and all of the illegal drone strikes that are happening in middle eastern countries are based in Ramstein, Germany. Whenever the USA decides that it's time to start a war of aggression [iraq, Afghanistan] or violate human rights [Drone strikes, KZ Guantanamo] the EU will be there as their servant. Like, not even the german interior secretary is allowed access to the US military base in Ramstein. What does that tell us?

looking at the new cabinet, we can probably guess on kissing this pretty planet goodbye.

China signing the climate agreement is more significant than Trump's decision to revert Obama's approval.

Withdrawing from it will take Trump at least one whole term of office, probably a good bit longer than that. By that time Trump may very well no longer be president and his decision could once again be reverted by a democratic president following him.

Although Trump has claimed that he's going to re-industrialize the USA it's questionable whether he'll actually be able to. Contrary to what he claims the US industry didn't lose its former glory to a mass-exodus of production to China but largely to the process digitalization. The jobs that have been lost in the process are lost forever. They cannot be brought back. And if these industry jobs can't be brought back it doesn't matter how much/little he or his cabinet cares about climate change - he can't just increase CO2 emmisions out of the thin air. Meanwhile, digitalization will continue to take its course eliminating more and more industrial jobs and Trump's opinions on that will not mean a thing. He can't undo reality.

At least one of the key figures in Trump's forum of econimi advisors, Elon Musk, is a strong proponent of renewable energies. I'm not sure how influential Musk will be but I think it's somewhat likely that Trump didn't include him for no reason.

Speaking of Musk and renewable Energies - should a major breakthrough happen during the ~5+ years it would take Trump to withdraw from the climate agreement his opinions and decisions could become even more irrelevant. In terms of climate politics the USA are already isolated enough as it is. Once certain technologies start to make their way to countries like India, China, Indonesia or the Philipines big time all of Trumps attempts to turn back time will turn out to be exactly as futile as everybody should have already known them to be anyway.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Yojinbo

[ping]

Lol no.

You have a serious overestimation of Russian military capabilities if you think it is or (ever really was) a conventional military superpower. Russia is a regional power at best.

Do you not consider Ukraine European? Are the Baltic states just afraid of a larger shadow of a small fly?

[Excellen Browning]

Ukraine is definitely a European country, as is Russia. The case of the Ukraine, specifically Crimea, is a little different from RUSSIAN IMPERIALISM INTO EUROPE OH NO and the Baltic states have nothing to fear, as members of NATO, as long as the rest of NATO doesn't throw them under the bus.

[Etrurian emperor]

Ukraine is definitely a European country, as is Russia. The case of the Ukraine, specifically Crimea, is a little different from RUSSIAN IMPERIALISM INTO EUROPE OH NO and the Baltic states have nothing to fear, as members of NATO, as long as the rest of NATO doesn't throw them under the bus.

But that is the exact problem. With Trump's statement we can no longer be 100% sure the rest of NATO is trustworthy.

We can guess it was merely electoral drivel but if our guess is wrong and if we didn't prepare for it to be wrong then the Baltic is in deep trouble.

I wouldn't deem the Baltic to be very different from Crimea if we were to take NATO out of it. The Baltic countries also have a large Russian minority and historical ties to Russia, perhaps not to the same extend but the similarities are there. These were the justifications Putin used to annex Crimea so why wouldn't they count for the Baltic if Putin feels he can get away with it.

[Life]

And actual defense. Last I checked the amount of tanks the Dutch had were a grand total of zero.

That's why Trumps Russian flirt makes Europeans quite wary. If we didn't think this would leave a big gap the talks about a EU army wouldn't have began again the moment the election ended.

This is silly.

The EU has always wanted an army, not because they fear a Russian invasion of the Balkans (which will not happen because if Russia does try to do that, the vast majority of the world will declare war on them). They want an EU army because the goal of the EU is to create a giant European superstate. Trump's election means that Juncker and the rest of the EU are scared that France will elect Marine Le Penn or the Dutch will elect Geert Wilders and try to leave the EU like the British. They dodged a bullet in Austria but if another big nation leaves, the EU will collapse entirely under the strain of countries like Greece and Italy.

Just because Putin is a thug and a terrible human being doesn't mean that he's stupid.

Just today, I read an article claiming that Russia and Syria are "influencing" the migrants in Germany to rape women in order to mess with the upcoming German elections. This is some next level conspiracy bullshit, bro. It's the Red Scare of McCarthyism all over again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4032432/Pro-EU-think-tank-says-Russia-Syria-orchestrating-migrant-sex-attacks-swing-upcoming-German-elections.html

​I DON'T LIKE THEM PUTTING CHEMICALS IN THE WATER THAT TURN THE FREAKING MIGRANTS RAPEY! DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?!

Edited December 19, 2016 by Pepe The Conquerer

[Yojinbo]

If the common consensus is that it's the responsibility of the USA to defend european countries against another european country then there's something horribly wrong going on.

[Life]

If the common consensus is that it's the responsibility of the USA to defend european countries against another european country then there's something horribly wrong going on.

The USA is the world's only hegemon and have been since the end of WWII. How is this something horribly wrong?

[blah the Prussian]

Doubluous posticus. Deleticus, pleasicus.

Edited December 19, 2016 by blah the Prussian

[Tryhard]

They want an EU army because the goal of the EU is to create a giant European superstate.

Got a source for this? Because this still seems as much of a conspiracy theory as any Alex Jones nonsense.

And yes, the latter thing involving rape is dumb as hell as well. Though to be honest the Daily Mail is a shit terrible source and shouldn't be trusted, and I would need to look into what they are citing.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Tryhard

[blah the Prussian]

Putin is a monster that must be stopped. While he might not be invading other countries, his disgusting, irredeemable invasion of human rights and monsterous treatment of LGBT individuals means he must be stopped at all costs. Same with the Middle East. We need to displace these horrific human rights locations in order to save the people that live there who are being victimized.

Let me tell you a story. In the 1970s, Iran, Afghanistan, and Jordan were among the most progressive countries in the region. Now, Jordan is the only one left. Why? Because the US and Soviets fucked up the region. Human rights came to Europe in 1789, existed for two years, and then the French turned around and started killing each other. Then, after one of the most horrific wars in human history, yay, democracy! Oh wait, no, not yay. Fascism and Communism.

So, why don't the Arabs want human rights? Well, he fact that every time human rights have come to the Middle East they've done so after the Americans have bombed their homes might play a small role. Let the Middle East improve their human rights on their own, as e Jordanians are doing and as the Iranians and Afghans were doing before the Soviets (with Iran admittedly it's a long story).

[Yojinbo]

The USA is the world's only hegemon and have been since the end of WWII. How is this something horribly wrong?

I don't answer rhetorical questions.

[Excellen Browning]

Got a source for this?

It's basically just Juncker. And maybe a few seats in the European parliament. Most are against it.