The Trump Presidency Ocho :: It Can't Go On. A.K.A. We All Gotta Duck / When The Shit Hits the Fan

Of course if the us is the one escalating a situation to a point where intervention is "necessary" that whole little fantasy of yours is completely pointless.

 

I am asking politely for you to read the post you just responded to.

 

The sentiment is correct and I begrudgingly agree. However, that is not really what we are doing. Or, more accurately, we are selectively doing this. And worse yet, creating our own issues to serve our corporate interests.

We dont always jump into the middle of a genocide in places we dont seem to care about, say Africa or certain Middle Eastern countries. Or worse yet in Yemen's case, actively work to continue the genocide. We manufacture interventions when democratically elected officials are ones we dont like (or sometimes our corporate leaders dont like). Granted that doesn't happen nearly on the scale it used to but isn't unheard of during this generation.

Our solution lately seems to be to drop bombs or ruin economies, which tends to lead to the later. All the while we have China and Russia and others building relationships through more subtle means.

 

It sucks, it's not great, it's immoral, and I would 1000% prefer it's us doing it over, say, Russian or Chinese military intervention to benefit their corporate interests at the same time. If other groups get in the game of being the ugly world police, things get really messy, really fast.

Just look at Syria. A small skirmish between Russian mercenaries and US special forces almost started a much larger incident. I don't think we should be in Syria, you probably don't either, but if someone is going to intervene in Syria, I'd rather it be one nuclear power rather than two. Imagine if in a multipolar world, you had US, Chinese, Indian, American, British, French, German, and Japanese soldiers fighting past/around each other in dozens of hotspots around the globe.

One of them is going to cause an incident, which causes a war, which kills a heck of a lot more people than some drone strikes in Pakistan or shelling Raqqa indiscriminately. (Again, these are not GOOD things, I would just rather not have them happening AND fights between superpowers)

Until someone can beat us at our game - just like we beat the British - it'll be us doing the shitty job of policing the world. Maybe, rather than bemoaning our self-anointed role, we should elect people who will do it better.

 

Sure it does, smh. But we have to the electoral collage because it would be horrible if Washington State told Ohio what to do but it is fully ok the other way around. This is a paraphrase of your own argument.

 

Subtlety and the United States seldom go hand-in-hand (or so it seems). Here's how USA reacts to international incidents that involve and potentially harm our "interests".
1. Express concern or outrage over incident(s).
2. Make threats against the nation/group thought to be behind said incident(s).
3. Try to muster support from our traditional western allies prior to military action. Don't rule out the possibility of USA 'going it alone'.
4. Launch missiles, drop bombs, authorize drone strikes, and/or send in ground forces, depending on the logistics and nature of the situation.
5. Only offer diplomacy as a solution to the crisis once the area/local populace in question has been subdued.
6. Keep troops in said location for perpetuity if step 5 does not attain desired effects for the benefit of the United States (first) and the country/region of conflict (second).

 

I think it was Blanche who told Stella that Stanley Kowalski was an ape!

 

Agreed. I dont know if we ever truly mastered soft power but I wish we had. There are (sometimes) better ways to manage a situation than blowing shit up, especially since we have the tendency to blow up the wrong stuff.

 

This is a nice one...

 

So about that secret deal.

It seems to be an agreement (Mexico says not binding)

The Mexican congress is not very happy about that agreement. But the Mexican government can't do much about it, Trump has them by the balls, in 45-90 days Trump can raise the tariffs again.

Shit even if they agree to become a "safe" country, Trump can use the Tariffs for something else. The Mexican economy is way too dependent on the USA, so they have little leverage to resist the bulling.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/under-fire-home-trump-mexico-races-roll-migration-184716100.html

 

FYP

 

Yeah but! Only Iran is not sending letters of love to our glorious leader.

 

So if Ayatollah whoever promises to juggle Trump's balls* at a conference, a Big Beautiful Agreement is possible between our two peace-loving nations?

*Iran invented ball juggling

 

There it is. The answer to world peace.

 

Cue the responses from...
German Monitor
Dutch Monitor
Iranian Monitor

 

Somebody has to keep that Massively hungry Industrial Military Complex turning over. Those Billions/Trillions of tax dollars have to be put to a "good use"

Remember the likes of Pinochet or more relevantly the Shah of Iran.

 

We can police the world without Pinochets and Pahlavis. We just have to pick leaders who will do things better than they have thus far.

 

I hate to break it to you, but countries are already doing whatever they want. Our ability to control outcomes has been slipping since Vietnam. Which is the whole point. We're not up for the job anymore. The fact that we're deluding ourselves that we can still do this job does more harm than good.

You seem to think the world is still policeable. You seem to think we have a choice. What I see is a more fragmented power structure with various new actors asserting themselves. The fact that we're still stuck in a stalemate in Afghanistan is an example of how incapable we are of influencing outcomes. In the end we're just making ourselves look pathetic. We're floundering on the world stage so everyone can see how little resolve we have left. And in the process we're bankrupting the country and just burning through our little remaining credibility and geopolitical capital.

The way I see it, Trump was the final nail in the coffin of American credibility abroad. Why would anyone trust America in any sort of long term partnership? At least China is offering stability and is less likely to destabilize regions by stirring up civil wars.

At this point, the only way to regain strength is to regroup through retreat. Focus on restrengthening our remaining alliances that are based on common values. And hopefully improve America's image and credibility over time on the global stage. Hopefully those alliances can eventually expand once everyone sees that we are serious, reliable, fair and resolute.

 

Yesterday Trump announced Tom Homan would replace Nielsen at DHS. Homan said nope.

I like the efficiency...quit BEFORE you are humiliated by Trump.

 

That would, most likely, be the ONLY thing that could "demean 'Yakkity Sax.'"

 

It seems like the right wing hacks who were taking these positions in the first year and a half of the Trump reign are beginning to learn this lesson. It is bad for their futures.
Just look at the "interim" cabinet posts.

 

There's got to be a position in there somewhere for Jerry Falwell Jr.

 

Haha, missed that one. How do you announce before verifying? Rookie stuff.

 

Because Trump neither thinks nor verifies.
He just spouts crap.

 

Since it is behind a wall, I am posting the entire article from Josk at TPM. IMHO, he nailed it.

Having Zero Credibility Has Costs

The current (as yet) low level crisis in the Persian Gulf is a good example of the consequences of extreme, chronic lying on the part of the US government. All government’s lie, as I.F.Stone put it. But they don’t all lie to the same degree or in the same way. The Trump administration lies at almost unprecedented levels even compared to the Bush, Nixon and Johnson administrations. Those three lied about intelligence and international incidents with far greater consequences (so far); but for pure willingness to lie and frequency, it’s just not even close.

With that said, you don’t need to assume irrationality or perfidy on the part of the Iranians for them to be behind this. We had a deal with the Iranians backed by all the global powers. We broke the agreement and are now trying to strangle the Iranian economy with new sanctions. By historical standards those actions are reasonably understood to be acts of war. Low level attacks on commercial shipping just under the level that might trigger direct US retaliation has a clear logic to it.
{MOD EDIT - Paywall or not, still not allowed}