Burning ghost wrote:I think it is fair to say the bad and ugly regards Trumps words have been talked about at length here and there.
I am interested in the "Good". Whether you see Trump as a good or bad choice I am interested to here about what things you find as being at least partially "positive". I don't really think there is a singular political decision that can be made without some kind of relatively "negative"/"positive" consequence.
So I am asking also for those who like Trump to look for negative consequences of what they see as good (even if they are only minute in your eyes) and for those that do not like Trump to look for positive consequences (even if they are only minute in your eyes).
Thank you
I voted for Trump. Just as I did Obama his first run for the Presidency. Just as I regretted wasting my energy and time voting for Obama I've regretted the same now with Trump.
Trump was charged by me with one simple task. Just one. To improve US relations with Russia. I did not ask him to find a cure for any type of cancer or establish a colony of scientific laboratories on planet Mars. Sure, half the Republican Party was going to stand in his way along with half the party of warmongering and emotionally charged Democrats, but he seems to have underestimated that. He still could have stuck to his guns like Christ going before the Democrats and Republicans of his time in trial to be tortured, ridiculed, and them put to death to cheering crowds, for apparently "having dealings with the Russians" of his time.
Instead, Trump bombs Syria, in violation of International Law just as Obama and Hillary did before him. Just as many Republicans want. All the while allowing the country of ISIS to continue on running their economy in Iraq and something like 40% or 50% of the Syrian territory. Territory they got by expanding (no Americans, that is not Russia, that is your Allie ISIS who helps you fight the secular, Western dressed medical doctor Assad), and they attempt to try and
expanding their physical territory. ISIS trades oil. Probably selling oil to US friends and not Russian friends. Because Russia and Assad are trying to reduce the
territorial size of the country of ISIS. But Trump with the Democratic and Republican regimes are trying to make Syria, the Syrian people, lose their fight against ISIS and the hundreds of rebel/terrorist outfits with funny names that have flooded into Syria in hopes of taking the secular Assad out of power. The Sunni (that includes Saudi Arabia) don't like Assad because they view him as an Islamic heretic. His branch of Islam believes in something of a Trinity manifestation of sorts of the One God. Which reminds one of Christianity with its Trinity dogma. His branch of Islam even celebrates a few Christian holidays.
I thought this is the kind of
tolerant, religion of peace, Islam that liberals in the UK and USA are constantly going on about is the
true face and reality of Islam? But these same liberals believe like religious fanatics, giving bland faith, in the CIA and all their wicked lies to tell through their agents in the de facto state owned US mainstream news stations. So, liberals back bearded Islamic conservative fanatics causing war in Syria, probably financed by Saudi Arabia that bastion of democracy, religious tolerance, gay parades, and secular rule where women drive cars alone like Assad's wife drives by herself in Syria.
And Trump has embraced these evil lies about Assad and Russia so that the politicians in his party won't undermine him and bring his administration to a grand stall. So, he appears to have joined their club. Assad did not gas a relatively small number of civilians. Why? Because it would be stupid. The American backed terrorist did it. The people Trump now finds himself supporting. If Assad wanted to use gas as a weapon against his enemies he could deploy its use on mass numbers of ISIS soldiers and mass numbers of the actual armed combatants
that threaten his government and himself. Some 4 year-old kids do not threaten his government or him. Bearded armed men backed by the American CIA are real threat for him though.
This bombing of Syria and condemning Russia in the process does the exact opposite of improving relations between the two nuclear powers.
A lesson about blind faith in the academic credentials and careerism of politicians can be had in the case example of the former President of Brazil: Lula. Perhaps the greatest President that nation ever had. And yet he had no more than a 3rd grade education and rose through blue collar labor. He claimed his success was by a simple formula: do the obvious.
How does that relate to Trump and the current political, international climate?
Trump
is not doing the obvious which is reducing tensions between the two largest nuclear powers that could bring most evolution, most life (of all sorts of species) on earth to an end. Boris Yelstin a hardcore alcoholic (walked out the White House in DC, drunk, in his underwear trying to catch a cab at night to go get a pizza) activated the Russian nuclear brief case to launch
mass nuclear launches on the United States in 1995. A scientific rocket launched from Europe gave off radar signatures of US nuclear missile. Russian military officers were unsure the US had launched a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Russia. But when the rocket dropped one of its engines, supposedly it gave off the same radar signature of US submarine launched missile armed with multiple nuclear warheads. The Russian military officers no longer were uncertain they were
certain the US had launched a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Russia meant to knock out its electricity before it launched a mass wave of other nukes. So, they awoke President Boris Yelstin, handed him the nuclear brief case, and told him "Mr. President, we are under nuclear attack from the United States, you must launch mass nuclear annihilation of the USA." Roughly that.
Boris Yelstin came within minutes and possibly 10 seconds of launching the first nuclear war in human history. A nuclear annihilation of the USA. Which the USA would have launched a mass nuclear annihilation of Russia. Global nuclear winter would likely set in. Destroying crops and freezing the Brazilian Amazon. Bone chilling cold, famine, and disease would be the fate of human survivors across the world. Slow, brutal, death. No Obama care, no welfare, no Politically Correct world to hide behind, no police to call and rescue you as roaming hungry mobs of men run after you and your small son or small daughter to both rape your small child and then eat them. Cannibalism.
What gave Boris Yelstin pause was that he had
good relations with President Bill Clinton and he could not believe the USA would launch a nuclear attack on Russia.
Good relations. Between two nuclear powers that collectively own something like 95% of the nuclear bombs on earth.
Fast foward to today. The USA is building missile systems in Poland that are nuclear capable so that they can strike Moscow in 10 minutes rather than the 30 minutes that both the USA and Russian nuclear ICBM's can reach their target city in. Combined with some British politician or something threatening Russia with a
pre-emptive nuclear attack. I guess the Boris Yelstin case example in 1995 was not a sufficient lesson for college educated Brits and American politicians that nuclear weapons are
not toys.
Trump would probably be a better head of a country if he only had a 3rd grade education and had mostly worked in blue collar factory work. So would the idiots running the Democratic religion and Republican religion. These college educated fools actually think a mass shooting in the USA is worse in scale than the nuclear bullets Russia will shoot at and hit humans, trees, birds, wheat, houses, electrical systems in the USA. Some survivors will go blind. Others will have their brains swelling inside their skulls. Others will give birth to deformed babies that are also mentally challenged.
But the industries that build military weapons
need the United States to have perpetual enemies. Tax payers must buy their weapons of destruction so that some of those in the industry can keep making financial profits. Trump is probably going to make them feel real good. I guess it's better to destroy and maim people than to heal them and keep them in good health. So, better for the Government to buy military weapons with tax dollars rather than say... using tax dollars finance universal health care throughout the whole nation for all citizens.
I also don't care for that show boating Trump did by dropping "The Mother of all Bombs" on ISIS operatives in Afghanistan. ISIS is a country in Iraq and Syria. A government with real physical territory running an economy and trade. But unlike Russia that country ISIS sends out operatives into other countries to commit terrorist acts. But the CIA owned media in the USA won't tell us that. Because we might have to do something about
that country rather than the country of Syria and Russia who are both United Nations member states.
You actually have to put ground troops on the ground to
take territory away from ISIS. Shrink the country in physical territory. Dropping a massive bomb in Afghanistan on ISIS operatives in some cave does not do that. But it gets an American President lots of sports-like enthusiastic applause from American citizens.
Or Trump could not put ground troops in mass numbers on the ground for a conventional war against ISIS. He could provide elements of support for Assad and the Syrian military, as well as the Russians, in their battle against ISIS and allow the Syrian military carry the burden of the ground war game.
Trump is not doing the obvious.
