I’m not unaware of the reasons you have, and many others, for your dislike of Trump: his background, his business dealings, his behaviour, his attitudes.

I can understand how you might feel about him being President with that sort of baggage.

However he is the President and he was elected on the basis of what he promised. If he won on the basis of who he was then that’s even more interesting. Which one was it?

If it’s his personality, his background, his attitudes, then it seems to be what many like about him. If it’s his promises then they like what he stands for. His promises he only has to deliver to his supporters, his opposition expect nothing because only the Democrats could give them what they want. Such is politics.

His constituency expect him to deliver on those promises. Has he failed them? I can’t be sure. I can read articles that say he has, then read articles that say he hasn’t. How is this possible?

There have been many Presidents adept at talking out of the sides of their mouths, Democrats and Republicans. Who can claim to be clean and honest in politics? Is Trump any better or any worse than others? Probably not.

So why the vitriol? Has he broken some sort of unspoken covenant about who America thinks it is? People claim he’s an embarrassment. Why? The rest of the world either likes him or detests him just as they do within the US, so what is embarrassing? Why should you care, he doesn’t represent you?

What the world is watching is the exposure of America institutions to the light and it doesn’t look good. Trump’s presence caused this and they exposed themselves through their response to his election.

Imagine what his constituency thinks, all their suspicions confirmed. Inadvertently or intentionally, who can know, he’s exposed a rats best inside the corridors of power. Everyone around the world sees that. That’s your embarrassment, that this has been going on for so long under previous Presidents and no one said anything. It makes you look very foolish and naive and confirms our suspicions about America.

This has nothing to do with a Trump. We always suspected you of this (apologies if I have it wrong and you are not American), now we know. So it became necessary for you to point the finger at Trump and say “It not us, it’s him!”

Don’t forget the political system that enabled this. People understand business, they know who they’re dealing with, they understand the corruption of business, the drive for the bottom line. But they depend on politicians. If politicians let them down where do they turn?

Iran is incompetent

Imagine if they had nuclear weapons.

It looks like evidence is pointing to Iran shooting down a Ukrainian aircraft filled with Iranian, Canadian and Ukrainian civilians. Not a good look, especially after the annihilation of Soleimani, the deaths of funeral-goers, and the bombing of Iraq. Iran is incompetent. — NOS4A2

So it looks (with the airplane accident). It happens with GBAD (ground based air defence) when it's put to highest alert. They start shooting everything moving in the air and identify targets later.

Similar thing happened with the downing of MH-17. Or earlier with the downing of Iran Air 655 by USS Vincennes (which mistook a civil passenger aircraft for an Iranian F-14).

What is now interesting to see how Iran handles the incident and of course we have to look what the investigation turns out. If it was an accidental downing, Iran can opt either to take the line that President Reagan did with Iran Air 655 and deeply regret the accident OR (which is more likely) take the "asshole-approach" that the Russians did with MH-17 and deny, deny and deny and then blame it on your opponent and not care about overwhelming evidence on the contrary.

Don’t forget the political system that enabled this. People understand business, they know who they’re dealing with, they understand the corruption of business, the drive for the bottom line. But they depend on politicians. If politicians let them down where do they turn? — Brett

Does then pinning your hopes on a politician promising change help? Or pinning your hopes on a narcissistic billionaire-pretend that wants to be accepted by the elite and would have been just fine as a TV personality?

All I could argue is that you really should more political parties. At least the two political parties should feel they can indeed perish, if they get things utterly wrong. How about a "Law & Justice Party" that has as it's primary agenda rooting out corruption and upholding the constitution?

Of course knowing US politics, that party would be run by some mobster or something...

Imagine if they had nuclear weapons. — Punshhh

Yes, Trump has achieved two things for them. 1) Given them an excuse to restart their nuclear program and 2) Shown that he's not willing to go to war over it. The winner here is the developing Russia/China axis with Iran and North Korea as untouchable assets harassing and undermining US interests.

Does then pinning your hopes on a politician promising change help? Or pinning your hopes on a narcissistic billionaire-pretend that wants to be accepted by the elite and would have been just fine as a TV personality? — ssu

Why not. What’s worked so far?

The winner here is the developing Russia/China axis with Iran and North Korea as untouchable assets harassing and undermining US interests

Yes Trump is pushing Iran over to the other side, a tragic miscalculation. Iran was key to the whole region, it straddles the underbelly of Russia. So with a ring of client states across the Middle East and into Asia, Russia will bare down on all the other small states in the region. Eventually the US will retreat and bury their head in the sand back home.

Question: why do we talk about Trump, but not Putin's persecution of homosexuals or Chinese concentration camps?

Question: why do we talk about Trump, but not Putin's persecution of homosexuals or Chinese concentration camps? — frank

Ducking >>>>

Yes, Trump has achieved two things for them. 1) Given them an excuse to restart their nuclear program and 2) Shown that he's not willing to go to war over it. The winner here is the developing Russia/China axis with Iran and North Korea as untouchable assets harassing and undermining US interests. — Baden

Correct.

You might then add 3) The administration sticks it's head into the ground and denies 1) and 2) and says everything is OK now. And anyone saying otherwise, especially those working for the government, will be a persona-non-grata considered hostile to the administration.

And in the end we'll talk about Iranian nukes as we do about North Korean nukes. And life goes on.

Why not. What’s worked so far? — Brett

Ever been a genuine effort to break the stranglehold of the two party system? I haven't.

Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive Party got 28% of the votes in the 1912 election.
Ross Perot as an independent got 19% in 1992 (and dashed hopes for the older Bush to get 2nd term).

And as said earlier (perhaps on another thread), it's only been these crazy dashes for the Presidency, not anything coming up from the communal and state level.

So I guess Americans are in fact really happy with the two parties they have.

May I suggest that you re-read what I've written? Nothing you've said about me and my so called 'embarrassments' make any sense in light of the fact that I am talking about the failings of American government on a whole...

Your continued slogan based defense of Trump would be excusable had you not just been shown it's shallowness in it's understanding...

Pay attention to what's being said here. Re-read.

Yes. You've summed it up in a nutshell. The world economy makes average Americans less of a consideration to those who have no sense of loyalty to their country and/or countrymen. The founding fathers wrote extensively about the perils of pure capitalists...

Imagine if they had nuclear weapons.

I suspect they’d blow themselves up.

Question: why do we talk about Trump, but not Putin's persecution of homosexuals or Chinese concentration camps?

I have always said it’s a matter of privilege. Many westerners are so far removed from tyranny and injustice that only Trump’s bad words are able to penetrate the solipsistic cocoons in which they’ve shielded themselves.

Not only that but I suspect that talking about Trump in a certain way allows the morally bankrupt to appear moral. Think of someone like Harvey Weinstein marching in those anti-Trump women’s marches in 2017. It’s virtue signalling.

So it looks (with the airplane accident). It happens with GBAD (ground based air defence) when it's put to highest alert. They start shooting everything moving in the air and identify targets later.

Similar thing happened with the downing of MH-17. Or earlier with the downing of Iran Air 655 by USS Vincennes (which mistook a civil passenger aircraft for an Iranian F-14).

What is now interesting to see how Iran handles the incident and of course we have to look what the investigation turns out. If it was an accidental downing, Iran can opt either to take the line that President Reagan did with Iran Air 655 and deeply regret the accident OR (which is more likely) take the "asshole-approach" that the Russians did with MH-17 and deny, deny and deny and then blame it on your opponent and not care about overwhelming evidence on the contrary.

If Iran doesn’t hand over the black boxes or let Canada investigate the crash perhaps it will show the world that, no, Iran does not want to play nice with the international community. Anyways it will be interesting.

Has the actual cause of the downed airliner been confirmed?

I've seen differing claims and a video showing an explosion, but cannot confirm it was an explosion from a ground to air missile. Surely there are many videos to compare it to...

:brow:

This video shows what appears to be a missile hitting the plane.

Unless you have video footage that is a known missile strike to compare to... it's just an explosion...

I've seen that video.

Looks inconclusive to me. All the hype needs to shut up until the cause is known.

I think you’re right, but as far as I can tell the video shows the projectile hurtling towards the plane, which continued to fly after being struck.

I have always said it’s a matter of privilege. Many westerners are so far removed from tyranny and injustice that only Trump’s bad words are able to penetrate the solipsistic cocoons in which they’ve shielded themselves. — NOS4A2

So we dont have any frame of reference for concentration camps so they don't seem real to us? I'll buy that.

But why do Trump's bad words penetrate the solipsistic cocoons (by which you mean we're ostrocentric?) Because he is us?

Not only that but I suspect that talking about Trump in a certain way allows the morally bankrupt to appear moral. Think of someone like Harvey Weinstein marching in those anti-Trump women’s marches in 2017. It’s virtue signalling. — NOS4A2

True. He is us, but we need to think of ourselves as somehow above that?

Ducking >>>> — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Eh. There's a crowd I won't bother with anymore. There's no profit in it.

Looks inconclusive to me. All the hype needs to shut up until the cause is known. — creativesoul

I think CNN said it was an accident. They thought the plane was an incoming missile. To all the grieving families: :heart:

Question: why do we talk about Trump, but not Putin's persecution of homosexuals or Chinese concentration camps?

We don't talk about it because it hasn't been fed to us by the media. We talk about what we have been fed. People like me in the UK are acutely aware of this because we were onlookers while our media was controlled and manipulated by xenophobic rightwing media organisations during the Brexit process. Hence my rant against The Daily Mail earlier today( in the why do you think the US is going to war with Iran thread).

Now I am sensitised to this influence I can see how the media organisations are feeding us a narrative. The reasons why we get this story over the concentration camps in China should be analysed. At first sight it seems to me that rolling news looks for breaking news and when a story comes up which reaches a certain threashold of importance, it then gets blanket coverage and we all talk about it to the expense of all the other stories. This results in media organisations throwing all their weight behind certain stories, while ignoring others. This bias can be manipulated and was during the Brexit process.

Another side effect of this system is that we can become obsessed, or anxious about certain stories which are deemed to be of importance. Again this has a direction over time and can be manipulated.

We should make ourselves aware of the bias in the media we consume.

May I suggest that you re-read what I've written? Nothing you've said about me and my so called 'embarrassments' make any sense in light of the fact that I am talking about the failings of American government on a whole...

Your continued slogan based defense of Trump would be excusable had you not just been shown it's shallowness in it's understanding...

Pay attention to what's being said here. Re-read. — creativesoul

I said, “ People claim he’s an embarrassment”, not yours personally, and where I did say ‘yours’ I meant the feelings of the country in their feelings about how the world views America and Trump. Now these feelings have been reported many times so I’m guessing you understand what I mean. However, knowing your views I would guess that you do personally regard him as an embarrassment.

If you’re only talking about “ in light of the fact that I am talking about the failings of American government on a whole...” then I guess you might also consider that an embarrassment to the world, which of course it is. And my post is addressing that very point.

This is what I said; “ What the world is watching is the exposure of America institutions to the light and it doesn’t look good.“

I reread my post and I can’t see any examples of “slogan based defence”. Rereading it I also see that I was sympathetic to your feeling on Trump’s election.

Quite possibly I could have avoided using the word “you” when I should have used “America” and avoided personal insult, if that’s what I’ve caused?

We should make ourselves aware of the bias in the media we consume — Punshhh

Yep, same here

We should make ourselves aware of the bias in the media we consume — Punshhh

I think surveys indicate that to be true already. Faith in the media is very low. The problem is that we have our own take on things and seek information that contributes to that view. There’s nothing wrong in that, unless you think that view is wrong, then the news source one has is either leftist or right wing.

Iran finally admits it shot down the jet. Incompetence.

The problem is that we have our own take on things and seek information that contributes to that view. There’s nothing wrong in that, unless you think that view is wrong, then the news source one has is either leftist or right wing. — Brett

I disagree. There IS something wrong with that. As individuals, it reinforces confirmation bias.