|
How about this, Majorian. As soon as Trump uses the word "invade", in any positive context, then I will admit he is running as an interventionist candidate. Until then, no deal. And 14 years ago doesn't count
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
No Mans Land posted:The gulf states are useless. Well, you say that, but... quote:As part of Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve, those who have conducted airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Jordan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Those who have conducted airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, France,the Netherlands, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. I count four Gulf States in there carrying out airstrikes, supporting the anti-ISIS factions within Syria. ISIS-controlled territory has shrunk precipitously over the past year, and their finances have been slashed. The Obama strategy, in spite of its major blunders early on, is now working. Trump's strategy of sending in ground troops to seize ISIS-controlled oil fields would be a very dumb move. No Mans Land posted:How about this, Majorian. As soon as Trump uses the word "invade", in any positive context, then I will admit he is running as an interventionist candidate. Are you under the impression that neoconservatives frequently use the word "invade" when selling interventionist policies? Look, you're free to keep denying it as much as you like, but the policies that Trump advocates in Syria and Iraq are interventionist, full-stop. The fact that he doesn't use the word "invade" means nothing whatsoever. e: I missed this earlier: No Mans Land posted:You didn't show anything that I didn't already know. Non-interventionist tendencies are enough. I'm not seeing any "non-interventionist tendencies" from Trump at all. Every specific policy proposal he's offered about the Middle East is an interventionist one. "Non-interventionist tendencies" is just about the biggest grouping of weasel words I've ever seen by the way. "We have non-interventionist tendencies - we just had to intervene here. And here. And here. And here BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE INTERVENTIONIST!" Majorian has issued a correction as of 20:01 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Youre harping on something that is clear Trump no longer supports as a way to score some kind of points. The oil field plan was part of the pre-Russia world, and yes, was not a great plan even then. But it got people talking. And neoconservatives, i said this before, were a very specific group of people. They are not accepting new members. They had a very specific ideology and their own specific think tanks (PNAC was the big one). Theyre still around just discredited and scattered. Trump is in no way a neoconservative. Lastly, interventionism and neoconservatism are not synonymous. Anyway at the end of the day I don't think Trump has a penchance for empire building, that's it and that's all. The rest is semantics. That said there is a significant empire already and so a lot could be done under "empire defending". South china sea, north korea, ukraine, some poo poo happening in mexico or on the border, who knows. I don't personally support any of that either but it is a complicated world with lots of entanglements that can't just be run from.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Ok, you say theyre interventionist, i say theyre continuations of existing policy with modifications. Drop it now? Presidencys are a continuum. The president doesnt get to start fresh. It would not be an intervention in a fresh new situation. If you disagree with me past this point then i dont know what im gojng to do. But the thread will suffer
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
No Mans Land posted:Youre harping on something that is clear Trump no longer supports How is it clear that he no longer supports sending troops into Syria and Iraq to secure ISIS-held oil fields? quote:And neoconservatives, i said this before, were a very specific group of people. They are not accepting new members. I'm getting the impression that you don't know what neoconservatives are. No Mans Land posted:Ok, you say theyre interventionist, i say theyre continuations of existing policy with modifications. Drop it now? No, because what you've said here is bullshit. Sending troops in to seize ISIS-held oil fields and advocating torture of suspected terrorists are not modifications of existing policy; they're fundamental changes to existing policy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
The thing is Trump will be under pressure to accommodate a Republican congress, and he'll likely have to rely on the Republican bench for appointees. The closer Trump gets to actual power the more I'd expect him to act like a fairly typical GOP candidate, though I admit with Trump nothing is entirely predictable. His administration isn't going to be a perfect blank slate, it's going to at least partially reflect the values and priorities of the political party he's chosen to seize control of. The place he's been relatively consistent is in decrying bad trade deals and on that front he's like to be better than either Clinton or any other GOPer. Whether he'll actually break away from America's long tradition of policy blunders in the Middle East is impossible to predict though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Majorian posted:How is it clear that he no longer supports sending troops into Syria and Iraq to secure ISIS-held oil fields? Here just read this and shut the gently caress up for a second http://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trump-is-alienating-neoconservatives-and-anti-war-democrats-should-worry/
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
They are new responses to an existing situation. In the case of an oil field attack, were old plans to an old situation however.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
No Mans Land posted:Here just read this and shut the gently caress up for a second That doesn't really address the point I'm making, though, which is that invading Iraq and Syria to secure ISIS-held oil fields is an interventionist policy position. Neoconservatism isn't some sort of exclusive club; it's a worldview, one that Trump seems to share, given his propensity for interventionism. Fair enough, you got me on that one. Outright endorsement of torture of terrorists is a fundamental shift in policy. quote:The place he's been relatively consistent is in decrying bad trade deals and on that front he's like to be better than either Clinton or any other GOPer. On the other hand, he's outsourced lots of American jobs, so I'm not sure he really is an actual opponent of neoliberal trade deals. I think he's probably paying lip service. No Mans Land posted:They are new responses to an existing situation. That doesn't mean they're wise or justified (they're neither). Majorian has issued a correction as of 20:11 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
please stop quoting the broken brains guy who posts 200 times a day in this thread, tia
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
can you not say full stop anymore please
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That doesn't really address the point I'm making, though, which is that invading Iraq and Syria to secure ISIS-held oil fields is an interventionist policy position. Neoconservatism isn't some sort of exclusive club; it's a worldview, one that Trump seems to share, given his propensity for interventionism. Ok why do neoconservatives hate him then? He's not one of them for starters. Also that's the end too. You're being tautological at this point, he's a neoconservative because he's interventionist, but he's an interventionist because he's a neoconservative... Not wise or justified? Ok great. End of the road reached, youve offered your opinion. It would be an unwise extension of existing policy. Drop it now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:please stop quoting the broken brains guy who posts 200 times a day in this thread, tia We must not shy from struggle, in this place
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
T r a v i s posted:You know a post is going to be some ownage when it begins with LOL, They're also very good when they begin with faux old-timey surprise such as Goodness, or Oh my, and include the  or  emotes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
No Mans Land posted:We must not shy from struggle, in this place There are better uses of your time than seriously engaging with "Oh how very quaint " guy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:please stop quoting the broken brains guy who posts 200 times a day in this thread, tia There's nothing broken brains about that when you guys make it so fun! I love seeing your horrible justifications for supporting a guy who advocates policies that you claim to be fundamentally against. It's textbook cognitive dissonance - which, in a sense, is the ultimate broke brains thing, if you think about it. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Majorian posted:cognitive dissonance I got bingo! Where's my free trump hat
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Majorian posted:There's nothing broken brains about that when you guys make it so fun! I love seeing your horrible justifications for supporting a guy who advocates policies that you claim to be fundamentally against. It's textbook cognitive dissonance - which, in a sense, is the ultimate broke brains thing, if you think about it. stop using all the goon words
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
T r a v i s posted:There are better uses of your time than seriously engaging with "Oh how very quaint It's true, when it comes to that mudwrestling with pigs versus arguing with engineers analogy, i can't tell anymore if i am the engineer, or the pig. Edit - definitely not the engineer No Mans Land has issued a correction as of 20:30 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
So what's going to happen to the Republican party after the elections? Who will continue the mantle of Trump?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
T r a v i s posted:There are better uses of your time than seriously engaging with "Oh how very quaint You're just mad somebody else is shitposting in your garbage thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
this thread used to be cool
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:this thread used to be cool Politifact rated this claim as Mostly False
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Im like an autist who thought daddy was hurting mommy but really mommy liked it
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
caberham posted:So what's going to happen to the Republican party after the elections? Who will continue the mantle of Trump? I can't think of another prominent Republican that could develop the massive cult of personality that Trump has. The party will take a good long hard look at itself, just like after 2012, and continue to cater to the white vote as much as possible. They will never win the Presidency again, but will continue to gently caress up states where they get voted in and stonewall everything in Congress because there's a Democrat in the White House.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Daddy=majorian and mommy=this thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:this thread used to be cool i dunno, i laughed when majorian said bernouts were smarter than the trumpenproletariat
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Just add Majorian to ignore. I did and it makes this thread about 50% better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Wait, why wouldn't Trump win? Clinton would go down like a sack of bricks in the general. Just watch and learn
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:i dunno, i laughed when majorian said bernouts were smarter than the trumpenproletariat I never said that. Scurrilous rumormongering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:Just add Majorian to ignore. I did and it makes this thread about 50% better. if i wanted to shut out the outside world i'd post in dungeons & discussions
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Fiction posted:You're just mad somebody else is shitposting in your garbage thread 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
No Mans Land posted:Wait, why wouldn't Trump win? Clinton would go down like a sack of bricks in the general. Just watch and learn The data's not exactly favorable to him right now. It could change but right now it's not looking good for him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The data's not exactly favorable to him right now. It could change but right now it's not looking good for him. tree nuts
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The data's not exactly favorable to him right now. It could change but right now it's not looking good for him. He's barely started on Clinton, as he says
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Pot, kettle
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Fiction posted:You're just mad somebody else is shitposting in your garbage thread It is actually you who is mad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
No Mans Land posted:He's barely started on Clinton, as he says The estimates I've seen are that he'd need a big increase in white turnout and he'd need to win about 7 out of 10 white males, which is more than any president in modern memory has managed to do. That or he'd need to really sell himself to some of the women or ethnic voting blocks who currently express negative opinions of him in polls. The only plausible scenario where Trump wins involves some kind of impossible to predict economic calamity or terrorist attack shaking up the current electoral landscape in ways we just can't anticipate. Clinton is a terrible candidate but unless all those voter ID laws that state Republicans have been passing end up suppressing even more votes than currently anticipated then Trump is facing a pretty steep uphill battle. Expect a lot of ads in the coming year aimed at swing voters talking about Trump university and detailing how even the last two GOP presidential candidates condemned Trump and outright said he'd make the country less safe. This thread is gonna be a lot of fun when the actual election starts!
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Some of that may be true but ive noticed polling and big money have been pretty useless this time around. Its the independents that are really going to swing this thing and they havent been polled yet. They comprise 60% of all voters. Im one of them. The wild cards of this election and there's a lot of us And in some recent primaries (MA for one) Trump won across literally all demographics. I think that will be the trend going forward. Despite the narrative about women and minority groups, I don't think Trump will have an issue with them going by the numbers. This election will be decided individual by individual. No Mans Land has issued a correction as of 22:45 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 22:42
|
|