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
I mean, people say candidates like Le Pen and Trump play with people fears. Well, the same people who say that are just as bad as them when making 'WW3 is coming' if Le Pen/Trump gets elected. I'm not taking sides in the US election, but still waiting for a simple explanation from anti-Trump people about why americans shouldn't vote for him. And by 'simple explanation' I mean using other arguments than 'WW3', 'Civil war' and 'the economy will collapse'.
Wow. You are implying a lot here. You imply that because of all the political/economical crisis's, we can't head into a 'different' way in a more peaceful direction. What is that supposed to mean. That electing Trump will result in WW III? Because that's bullocks. I never said that, but you are implying that. We are not even there yet. Also, I do NOT believe in the means of fighting another World War. Luckily on THAT aspect humanity has become much smarter.
All I do is drawing comparisons for the sake of LEARNING from it. In this topic it's all about choosing the best president. including all the right-left-bashing and fingerpointing. But all I wanted to say is, that in today's ultra-complex world it is NOT fair anymore to judge a president or PM on only a 4 years term.
Another lesson YOU as a historian could learn from my comparisons is this: Self-criticism. WE all have the power to reason with our brains instead of our balls no? But in the end we are all part of society. And by constantly slamming doing the elite and the politicians -who perhaps really want to make the world better- we could be endangering our democracy. If you feel angry about politicians, then ask yourself first what you have been doing wrong all these years. If you can't pay a house, then do NOT sign a mortgage! That's my idea of things. By doing so I -I refuse to buy a house, because I can't!- am empowering myself, I am reasoning with less emotions, and I accept situations around me much easier in a a more nonchalant fashion.
So as you start slamming down my remarks, you are calling thee kettle black yourself. And if you imply that I am too emotional, then you ARE actually emotional.
Overigens, ik ben Nederlands.....ben centrum-progressief.....maar zie ook in dat de traditionele politiek niet meer werkt. En in dat opzicht zijn het maken van vergelijkingen met het Interbellum valide, OMDAT je zo pas op de plaats maakt. Maar ga alsjeblieft niet zeggen dat ik wens dat er een nieuwe oorlog komt. Ik ben extreem pascifistisch.
So far, absolutely no one has managed to give a simple explanation without resorting to announcing the apocalypse, on why I, if I were British or American, should not vote for Trump or for the UK to leave the EU.
I am quite dissatisfied when people imply that I want another World War. I for instance think that EVERYONE should vote. We need to use our democracy, but in a thoughtful way. So elections can really result in change....and changes for the better. Even long-term changes.
But I do feel that people's expectations of politics nowadays are high, immensely, unrealistic high. An example: My perfect harmonized society would we the one featured in Star Trek. No human exploits, no poverty, money disappearing, equality in every aspect, gays, transgenders, people with dark skin and light skin, everyone happy. But one needs to be realistic and realize that you can not put that weight on the shoulders of a polician to create such a society within a presidential term of four years.
All I want is some self-empowerment.
The Bernie supporters are a little unrealistic in my view. They need help (the young that is, who are increasingly without prospects or hope) but I agree that his prescriptions are not going to get implemented. He will not be able to get them through Congress, and this is the key point.
Read my post again and you'll see I made no political stance whatsoever. I don't warn for any new world war, I only ask you to refrain from the comparison you made, as it implies certain doom. If you don't want to imply such things, don't make those kind of comparisons.
@DaltonCraig007 it's a sad world we live in on that account. I had good reasons to vote against the association treaty with the Ukraine. Many around me condemned me for it, until we got talking. Turned out they actually thought I had some proper arguments. They didn't agree 9on all), but they were valid in their eyes. Now see if you can find any such discussion on the next US election in mainstream media.....
Actually.......when mentioning Neville Chamberlain, I think it's a prime minister that is being quoted more regularly these days. "This is the peace of our times", Chamberlain said when he ratified the Munich Treaty, without consent of Czechoslovakia....meaning that Hitler would promise not to conquer Poland or starting any other war. The Munich Treaty meant however that Sudetenland would be given to Germany, which at that point was part of Czechoslovakia.
Now in all honesty....tell me why we shouldn't compare this with today's Minsk Treaty and how Crimea now has been annexed by Russia?
Moreover, many politicians play with fire these days. Cameron is putting his entire future on emotionally driven referenda. First the referendum about Scotland becoming independent. Now endangering the future of the UK by a referendum about a Brexit.
In many ways.....that 'ballsy' leadership we saw back in the 1930's with Chamberlain too. Politicians need to be more careful....need to challenge themselves by selling a hugely difficult message and clear and understandable words to the people. I want to hear from a politician that there actually IS a grim future ahead of us and that it probably takes several terms...several decades....perhaps 3 or 4 decades....to improve our society again. And that he will do anything in his power to make the future better for our children, and not necessarily our current generation. That's the story I want to hear.
But sadly, 'power' is rising to the heads of politicians. They prefer to organize dangerous referenda or to state dangerous lines in a populist way, and at the same time by refuse to tell the big, unattractive complex story of our world in empathic and understandable words. In the end....history has proven us that Chamberlain lost track of the grim complexity of geopolitical affairs. And in a way I see that with Cameron too. We are only one month ahead of not just an exiting outcome of the Brexit referendum, but perhaps also a dangerous outcome too.
However, there will always be risks inherent with any environment undergoing flux, as Czechoslovakia was at the time (note that it doesn't even exist any more) and like Ukraine is now (I don't think it will stay together forever in its current state either). Especially due to their strategic importance and respective geographic locations to geopolitics.
The issues have to be looked at in the context of the changes that took place in the preceding 20+ years, and not just in the context of the changes that took place in the preceding 5 yrs (in both cases). These so called 'cleft' countries (a term coined by Samuel Huntington in the Clash of Civilizations) must always be treated carefully by large world powers, due to competing loyalties, ethnic mixes, and points of view within. Sadly, they are normally treated as mere pawns in a larger game of geopolitical chess.
Differences exist in the scenarios, objectives & strategic calculus of Hitler and Putin as well. Moreover, the world is a different place now. More connected. The consequences of war are far more significant and catastrophic, and that will impact decision making/scenario gaming on any issue by all parties.
Just because something happened then, doesn't mean that it can and will happen now.
This. Well said.
Yes, the article makes good points, but I am not sure what the overall message seems to be, here: that the world is a mess and we're all doomed, so it doesn't matter for whom we vote?
Well, we have to vote for someone. What gets lost, even among Americans, is that the President has limited power. Somehow, my fellow countrymen seem to think that the Prez is a dictator who can do whatever he/she wants. That said, the one thing the President has power to do is appoint justices to the SCOTUS. This is by far the most compelling issue right now.
In the meantime, we have the Berners acting like the biggest morons that I have ever seen in my 30+ years as a Democrat. They may very well deliver a Trump presidency. And if that happens, and when the SCOTUS moves right and removes Roe v Wade and puts greater obstacles in the way for progressivism, I do not want to hear a single whiny word from them.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/01/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-bernie-or-bust/index.html
As an American, I can't speak to the UK/EU situation. I'll try to address Trump without invoking Hitler...
Simply put, he's a con man, an egotist, and a bully. He lies repeatedly and can't even keep his own lies straight. Any time he's questioned about his lies he responds by insulting the questioner. He routinely insults women, or Mexicans, or Muslims, or reporters, or other politicians, and if he hasn't gotten to you yet just give him time. He hasn't even been endorsed by the leader of his own party (the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who will be the chairman of the Republican national convention) and states that he expects relations between Britain and the US to deteriorate if he becomes President...yet he has good words for Vladimir Putin and has just been endorsed for the office of US President by the glorious leader of the People's Republic of North Korea.
Does that give you some indication of why so many people think he's a totally inappropriate candidate for the office he seeking? I could keep going if you like, and I haven't even mentioned Armageddon yet...
Complicated problems. Sadly in execution, it's never that simple. :(
And we do embrace Trump for all the characteristics of him you wrote down above, yet Clinton gets slammed as the real 'evil witch' who can destroy Earth.
I really think this is a prime example of how populism develops in the western world. Common-sense politicians are being exchanged for, what you call, egoists, bullies, xenophobes, screamers, con artists and clowns. Well, frankly I find that dangerous.
Obviously Donald Trump is no Hitler. But let's not forget that what we perceive as a con artist or a charismatic clown, might really execute his insane, sick beliefs.
I personally prefer a presidential candidate who has been convicted for using a private computer for (top secret) work emails, who dares to stand trial and who eventually says a well-meant 'sorry'...than a presidential candidate who thrives on his own lies by preying via media on his voters. The latter I find way more dangerous, because it is being done deliberately.
That's assuming you can even decipher what Trump's so-called "solutions" are. Some of them seem to change by the day. His stance on abortion, where he managed to get on three different sides of the issue in the span of a day was especially pathetic.
I personally am pro-life (not looking for a debate on this), but can see how a reasonable person can arrive on the other side of the issue. And I can respect that opinion, even if I very much disagree with it. What I can't respect, though, is someone like Trump, who says one thing one minute, reverses himself within an hour or two, and then fires off a late night tweet somehow getting himself on board his third position on a particular subject in the span of 12 hours or so.
I won't, though, underestimate Trump by calling him a clown or whatever else the media likes to call him. Everything he's doing is very calculated, there's a specific purpose behind everything he's doing, and, at least in terms of getting himself to the top of the polls, it's working brilliantly. He's an opportunist who has bided his time, declining to run for the office before, waiting for the right moment when he knew he stood a good chance of winning. He found it in 2016 where he faced a group of Republican lawmakers he knew he could bully into defeat, and then on the other side he knew all he had was a historically unpopular candidate in Clinton and someone he could simply shout "Socialist" at until he was way out in front.
I will say, though, that maybe out of this we finally have a chance to legitimately establish a third party in the US. My hope, as unrealistic as it may be, is that Gary Johnson can get himself polling high enough to maybe be invited to one of the presidential debates. All of these Republicans who say they're willing to support Hillary over Trump, this is a chance to put up or shut up. They can support Johnson, a former Republican governor, and give Clinton the White House while doing some good on the national political stage by fostering an environment more inclusive of third party candidates.
Even that's calculated to a degree. He wings a lot of things in order to stay moving (almost like a shark), staying ahead of the media and the story. If he can stay ahead of the media, dictating the story to them rather then them dictating it to him, it keeps them from pinning him down on whatever lie he's telling at the moment. By the time the media pins him down on it, he's off to the next thing.
Or is he just good at hiring talented minions?
Say what you want about him (Hitler, fool, Drumpf whatever) but don't make the mistake of thinking he's stupid, or that he, on his own, can't run rings around all the strategists and marketers his opponents throw at him. He can. As I said, that has been his career and that is why he's where he is today, in life, and in the campaign.
I've followed him for nearly 20 yrs (since I was a kid) now, so I know exactly how he operates. He definitely oversells however, so those who are buying his potion are in for some disappointment, inevitably.
That's the case with all of them though.
Yes, and those qualities are indeed great assets for a self-made billionaire and real estate mogul. The point is: Presidential elections are not about electing a 'real estate marketer'........they are about electing an experienced person who understand the complexities of a country in the highest and must dignified office in the USA.
You know, the biggest problem I have with Trump is that we are heading again into the Bush Jr. years. Bush was also elected because people liked his cowboyish wit and charm.
Also, Trump still hasn't explained detailed policies. And people don't seem to be interested in that anymore. I find that rather dangerous. So should we hail Trump for being an experienced marketer?
We know full well that this is not the only skill required for the presidency. Not by a long shot. The American people know that too. They aren't stupid collectively imho.
As I've said before, the American electoral process is messy, and it's tough, but ultimately it has a convoluted way of picking candidates who can handle the pressure of the top job. I'm confident it will do so again this time, and I will live with the result, whatever it is. There are enough checks and balances in the American constitution to prevent a catastrophe. Damn shame the Democrats fell in line for the Iraq war, when they had a chance to stop it.
What I will not do is succumb to name calling and fear mongering, dressed up as rational thought.
If Trump's elected, we're heading into something far worse than that. Say what you want about W (and most do ;) ), but he at least understood the basics of running a country, having served as a governor beforehand. As bad as some decisions may have been, I'd say the majority of them wouldn't even approach the disasters that would occur if Trump actually made good on a good number of his campaign "promises" (if they can be called that, some of them change daily).
I don't respect that particular skill in a presidential election. I'm not insulting that skill, I simply don't respect it for running a country. The USA is not one of Trump's big skyscrapers. It's a territory populated with millions of people. Hence why I don't respect that skill. Trump needs to do what he does best: practicing capitalism to the extreme. He can do that much better than Clinton.
At the end of the day, the people collectively decide, and I trust their judgement, in each and every fair election everywhere, not just in the US.
You and I probably differ on that point, from what I'm reading, which again is your prerogative, and perfectly fine.
Democracy is not just something to be commended and applauded when it gives you the result that you want.
That sound right to you?
;)