It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Sorry, it's not going to be that way.
Just two points I'd like to make re: your most recent post. The Russian issue is NOT "an MIC-engineered issue - pure and simple." If it were, then our relations with Russia would have been significantly better during the Eisenhower era, he being the president who specifically warned the American people about the power of the military-industrial complex. There's a lot more to the decades of Russian/American saber rattling than your simplistic one-sentence put down would have us believe. If anything, the Republican Party has been far more antagonistic to Russia than the Democratic Party since the end of the Viet Nam war. I find the current state of US/Soviet relations -- oops, I'm sorry, I meant "revelations" -- more than a little ironic. Russia clearly WANTED Trump to be President, and your side just can't manage to find that at all troubling. Well, I do, and I'm not alone. 52% of the American people disapprove of Trump's actions so far, a historically bad rating for a president who hasn't actually even taken office yet. Just wait, the show's just getting started...
Let me also state for the record that I'm generally not in favor of using acronyms other than for organizations like FBI, CIA, ABC and so forth. MIC? Who's that? Is somebody using a microphone to amplify their opinions on the Russian issue? Are we about to follow up the MIC with a KEY, just because we like you? Let's try to keep our conversation plain by eliminating the acronyms, shall we? Which leads us to you saying how much you respect John Lewis for his decades of work in the field of civil rights, but really, as regards to the new new Trump regime, he should just shut the fuck up. Frankly, I don't think using the acronym makes the sentiment any more family-friendly, so let's drop the pretense here, shall we? As far as I'm concerned, you've just insulted a great American and an apology is due. And if you don't agree, you can KMA.
Just a friendly caution, @bj: your boy barely edged his way into an office he continues to show that he is in no way suited for...and a fair amount of that selection is being revealed to have been the result of meddling by one of America's chief -- let's say "rivals" in world affairs -- so it really behooves him, and you, to clean up your acts. The majority of the American voters didn't see things his way in the actual election, and just because an antique method of selecting the contest's winner says that he's the guy, don't think we're going to bend over backwards for him. Quite the contrary. I'd say "See you in the streets in just a few days," but you won't be there, will you?
Yes, of course we know that the Republicans have been more antagonistic to Russia & other countries in general (other than Israel) than the Democratic Party. I was referring to the current revelations about Russian meddling in the US elections, which is entirely a MIC issue, driven by the CIA who is hurting as its 5 year long ambitions in Syria were recently thwarted by the Russians, Iranians and Turks, despite loss of countless lives (including a US Ambassador). Sorry, but you can clarify what my acronyms are any time you want. Most people realize that MIC stands for Military Industrial Complex.
I truly am sorry that you and other Calexiters are still feeling disenfranchised two months out. As I posted a few pages back, perhaps your team's attempts at selling the new severed state to the Russians may bear fruit.
This is not a slightly pro-Trump topic. It's one giant Trump-gloryhole in here. One can critisize me for saying that.....and others again are free to come up with criticism about those hitting hard on Trump. That's IMO a huge intellectual deficit though. Again, Trump becomes president. He needs to act like one. Not others.
Now that this period is over, the internal battle for the soul of the Democratic Party is underway in earnest. Do they cater to the far left wing of the party, represented by Sanders, Warren & the Moore types? Where will they get their funding if this is their approach? I don't see this being viable at all. So alternatively do they swing to the middle and try to run a slightly left of centre operation? If they go down this route, who will be their standard bearer? Cory Booker? I think not. In short, this party is in a serious mess & it will take a long time for it to become a force again.
They have two options: (imho)
1. try to work with the President Elect to influence him in their direction on policy that they care dearest about (understanding that they will have to carefully pick their battles - tree hugging is definitely out for now), while simultaneously calling out the Republicans in Congress (as they did when they wanted to repeal The ACA without a replacement ready). This is what I expect Chuck Schumer & Co. to do.
2. try to personally discredit the President Elect. This 2nd option is a dangerous one in my view, because Mr. Trump is far more malleable ideologically than any other Republican power broker who may replace him. Moreover, such an approach will only raise the ire of those who voted for him, and of those who expect the three branches of Government to work together to solve problems rather than being deliberately obstructionist. It is already quite transparent to those who are watching closely.
There we go again: Obama was the devil the past 8 years by Republicans. But this time it's slightly different. All Democrats see the devil in Trump...but also a substantial amount of Republicans. In essence...the USA is so fff-ing polarized these days. Trump may only deepen and speed up this polarization. I just don't see at this stage what good can come from this man. Be prepared for tons of fillibusters.
Still, Trump could be nice....and actually keep the good things of Obamacare. Alas, he has u-turned recently and wants to get rid of every bit of ACA.
Anyway, if these attempts at delegitimizing Mr. Trump continue, expect things to get much worse before they get better, precisely because of polarization.
The Republicans should have worked with Mr. Obama more. He shouldn't have focused on ACA though. The Democrats should work with Mr. Trump. That's my 'naive' view of the whole thing. Otherwise, we will get Kanye West next time. Then you will definitely have reason to be 'afraid'.
Post-Trump, if things continue on this contentious path, I believe we will see one of two things. Either someone far more outside the beltway and extreme (like Kanye) or a complete technocrat insider (since everything will be a total mess and will need cleaning up, like in Greece & Italy).
That's the difference here. I don't welcome Trump to fail. But I do welcome a change in his rather childish attitude towards the presidency. In here I strongely urge Trump to do or not to do certain things. And I articulate it, with arguments. In your case however, you merely want Warren to fail big time without even nuancing her flaws are asking yourself how she actually can become succesful. That's what I call intellectual deficit.
One should also keep in mind that the Syria/Iraq crisis is at least partly an heritage of the Iraq invasion in 2003. I don't think, Obama can be blamed for this. He more or less had to pick up the pieces from his predecessor's foreign policy. However, Obama had a respectfull if critical relationship with China, improved the relationship to Cuba, Iran, the Arabian contries, South and Central America, Western Europe. Actually, the relationship between the US and the rest of the world has improved tremendously and I fear the US is on the way to loose these achievements.
@GBF, I hear where you're coming from, believe me.
Mr. Trump was elected to reposition America, whose importance has been in rapid decline both under Bush and under Obama. Relations with Europe may have been strong, yes. However, relationships with China, Russia, Israel, and many other countries are quite weak. The left leaning press isn't as critical of him on these fronts, but that's a fact. You are absolutely correct that the illegal Iraq invasion and occupation (Republican led with Democratic complicity including Hillary Clinton) has cast a terrible and lingering stench on the US throughout the world. I don't think it can ever really be exorcised, and many were telling these idiots that it would be the case in 2003 but they didn't listen. Why? War mongers again, supported by military, banking, oil & intelligence folks.
I believe that Mr. Trump is attempting to reprioritize American foreign policy to benefit industries outside of the military & defense. It's a commerce and industrial focused strategy & will take several years to achieve. He is already facing significant resistance to this approach from.....you guessed it - the same crowd, using their willing idiots on both sides of the aisle in Congress to do their dirty work for them.
In these situations, the strategic priorities shift. Have you noticed that the 'old world' nations like Turkey, China, Iran, India, etc. are reasserting their influence? We should look to the past for hints of where we are headed. Deals will be between nations and will shift as needs shift (which will be frequent). Deals will also be cut on specific matters, and will be more transactional. Mr. Trump recognizes where we are headed, and he is actually just going with the flow. That change is inevitable.
Good remark @GBF. No one is talking about it, but the rise of neo-nationalism and protectionism never really resulted in something good. Or @BondJames may has a few surprises up his sleeve and mentions a good example.
As I've said, the Trump Administration is going to reposition America, whose importance has been in decline. The IMF, World Bank, $, NATO etc. are at risk of becoming less important as foreign policy levers. The Chinese in particular are becoming increasingly strong in world trade and the remnibi will fully float soon enough. So there are massive implications for the world and investments on account of this. I'm not fully aware of what Mr. Trump and his team have in mind, but I can see from their rhetoric that they have started the process of a concerted repositioning.
Try to be mindful of the rhetoric vs. the reality. Look to the campaign for clues. Mr. Trump's bombast hides his true intentions, which are normally negotiated behind closed doors. Witness the deals he has struck with Corporations since winning the election for clues to the approach he will take with nations.
well relationships with China won't become better if the American president elected makes one affront after each other. China is an intersting country since there is a massively growing share of middle class workers meanhwhile with a substantial economic welfare but with no political rights. There might be the time when Chinese people look at Western democracies and take these as positive examples for their own country. Therefore I think that good and respectfull relationships are important. I don't find that Trump is really good in representing Western values and rather behaves like an arrogant and thin-skinned narcissist. He isn't much different from Putin or Erdogan in this regard.
And Western European Countries have always been the most important alliance partners of the US. So improving the relationship or destroying them is more than a footnote. I am still not sure if Trump is aware of that.
To Israel: It is right that the relationship between the US and Israel have got worse during Obama's presidency. However, the nuclear deal with Iran has at least led to a bit more stability in the region. You have always mentioned how peacefull Trump's foreign policy will be. But what is he going to do when the nuclear deal is indeed canceled and Israel is again going for a pre-emptive attack? This would lead to a total catastrohe......
He is hoping to alter certain relationships and dynamics to benefit the US. China is the chief economic rival. Russia is merely a distraction. The current approach has been to vilify and sanction Russia in order to bring it onside with Western ambitions (as well as benefit the Intelligence Agencies and 'MIC' weapons sales, as I've noted previously). Mr. Putin is not playing that game & is actually making fools of this strategy (to date at least) since it's so transparent. So the Trump Administration is looking to bring them 'out of the cold' as it were in a different way, to benefit their strategic stance on China. It will either work, or it won't, but it's worth a shot. Again, China is the chief rival here - not Russia. The West is trying to find ways to use Russia as a negotiating pin against China.
The Chinese are a very old, proud and culturally rich nation. They are looking to reassert their global supremacy of old. I am of the belief that they will never look to the West for guidance. They have their own way.
Regarding 'Western European Countries': Of course Mr. Trump is aware that the relationship is important. However, the EU has to show that it can survive first. That will be up to the European public. It's currently a very tenuous (and in my view unsustainable in the long run) situation over there. They have not enacted the reforms to that system that is necessary. Fix it or it will collapse. Quickly. The winds of change are fierce.
Regarding Israel and Iran: As I mentioned earlier, it is in these two areas that I don't agree with the incoming Administration. I don't agree with Mr. Obama and Kerry either, because I don't think that antagonizing Israel is going to solve the matter. However, they were right to stand up for the settlements issue and I think the Iran issue must be handled very deftly. I can only hope that Mr. Trump does not cave into pressure from Bibi.
Like I've said all along, give it a chance. His rhetoric and pomposity is part of his shtick. Why people can't see this is beyond me. The trick with the President Elect is not to take everything literally. He is deliberately vague and mutable so as not to give away what he really wants.
The Teacher's Unions are a force to be reckoned with (not always for good) & the same applies to the drug & insurance companies. If you have to go up against a concerted and unyielding bureaucracy with serious lobby firepower, you have to bring fighters who know their subject, and both of these two do.
I realize it's common these days to take outrage at everything (like equating negativity against a particular war with being unpatriotic, or equating calling out a civil rights leader for politicking with being against him or civil rights personally), but I am not abusing teachers. I am calling out the Teacher's Union as an institution for sometimes being intransigent and uncooperative, because their members are sometimes put before the public good, which should be about cost efficient and effective education.
Policy making must first and foremost look at things strategically with the overall public good in mind. As an example, Uber has benefited the consumer at the expense of taxi drivers, and efficiency & effectiveness will always have a negative impact on some.
Oh my!
His flatulence has bellowed! Someone, open a window!
==
from @walrus It was called the Cold War. The West was at war with the glorious Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. I don't think the reason behind post WWII east-west tension is one of history's great mysteries.
If there is some coherent point, lost in the fatuous rebuttal, to the perfectly coherent MIC observation made by the honorable and eloquent @bondjames, alas it is hopelessly and incoherently lost. Non existent actually.
MIC is a quite functional acronym btw - easily understood.
btw, "btw" ="by the way" and has been approved by the Acronym Police.
from @windbag Shall we? Really? Bite me.
Actually, the acronym does make for more family friendly, but when lefties lose their "poop," hide the women and children, but do bring the soap.
Did mommy never threaten to wash potty-mouth out?!
from @flatulence Lovely. Snark?
But you are serious. You probably really do think an apology is in order.
wth! (what the heck = family friendly, the HRC pic aside)
from @blowhard Egads!
@bondjames You've been told boyo!!
Clean up that act!!!!!!!
@WalrusAvecBlowhole demands it so.
Burp!
@bondjames asserted
Quite!
again from @honorablebondjames Yes. Double quite!
Yes, thanks for your tireless research and reportage on behalf of free world!
I am on walrus patrol, but will be attending the big event later this month, with full report.
Honorable website has paid my way
This Trump event!
Hail to her highness!!
Just 14 more days, until the lovely Pia must pass the torch and a new universal ambassador for peace and hugs is crowned.