Trump: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

Status
Not open for further replies.

exminister

Well-known member
One dead and 19 injured as car strikes crowds along route of white nationalist rally in Charlottesville

WAPO said:
CHARLOTTESVILLE — A chaotic and violent day turned to tragedy Saturday as hundreds of white nationalists, neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members — planning to stage what they described as their largest rally in decades to “take America back” — clashed with counterprotesters in the streets and a car plowed into crowds, killing one person and injuring 19 others.

Angela Taylor, a spokeswoman for UVA Medical Center, said 20 people were brought to the hospital in the early afternooon after three cars collided in a pedestrian mall packed with people. One died and the rest incurred injuries ranging from life-threatening to minor. Another 15 people were injured during street brawls, city officials said.

Earlier, police had evacuated a downtown park as rallygoers and counterprotesters traded blows and hurled bottles and chemical irritants at one another, putting an end to the noon rally before it even began.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe declared a state of emergency shortly before 11 a.m., saying he was “disgusted by the hatred, bigotry and violence” and blaming “mostly out-of-state protesters.”

Despite the decision to quash the rally, clashes continued on side streets and throughout the downtown. In the early afternoon, three cars collided in a pedestrian mall at Water and Fourth Streets, sending bystanders running and screaming. It was unclear if it was accidental or intentional.

“I am heartbroken that a life has been lost here,” said Charlottesville Mayor Michael Signer in a tweet. “I urge all people of good will--go home.”

Elected leaders in Virginia and elsewhere urged peace, blasting the white supremacist views on display in Charlottesville as ugly. U.S. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) called their display “repugnant.”

But President Trump, known for the rapid-fire tweets, remained silent throughout the morning. It was after 1 p.m. when he weighed in, writing on Twitter: “We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!”

At a late-afternoon news conference to discuss veterans’ health care, Trump said that he was following the events in Charlottesville closely. “The hate and the division must stop and must stop right now,” Trump said, without specifically mentioning white nationalists or their views. “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides. On many sides,” he said.

Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, a Trump supporter who was in Charlottesville Saturday, quickly shot back at the president. “So, after decades of White Americans being targeted for discriminated & anti-White hatred, we come together as a people, and you attack us?” Duke tweeted. “I would recommend you take a good look in the mirror & remember it was White Americans who put you in the presidency, not radical leftists.”

Dozens of the white nationalists in Charlottesville were wearing red Make America Great Again hats. Asked by a reporter in New Jersey whether he wanted the support of white nationalists, Trump did not respond.

By early afternoon, hundreds of rallygoers had made their way from Emancipation Park — where they had expected to protest the planned removal of a Confederate statue — to a larger park two miles to the north. Duke, speaking to the crowd, called Saturday’s events “the first step toward taking America back.”

“The truth is European Americans face tremendous discrimination in this country — jobs, scholarships, promotions,” Duke said. “The truth is we are being ethnically cleansed within our own nation.”

White nationalist leader Richard Spencer also addressed the group, urging people to disperse. But he promised that they would gather again for a future demonstration, blaming Saturday’s violence on counterprotesters.

Even as crowds began to thin, the town remained unsettled and on edge. Onlookers were deeply shaken at the pedestrian mall, where ambulances had arrived to treat victims of the car crash.

Susie McClannahan, 24, said counterprotesters were marching on Fourth Street when she saw a “silver gray vehicle” drive through the crowd, and then immediately shift into reverse in what she described as full speed.

“Everyone was in shock and all of a sudden we heard people scream get to the wall because the driver was backing up,” McClannahan said. She said those closest to the accident ran to those injured in the street.

“I didn’t want to believe it was real. It was just so horrible,” she said.

Hunter Harmon, 20, saw people “flung” in the air after they were hit by a car and he heard others screaming.

“We were marching and next to each other and all of a sudden I just heard a bunch of bangs and I saw a bunch of people flying through the air and people injured on the ground,” Harmon said.

Corinne Geller, a spokeswoman for the Virginia State Police said there were multiple injuries ranging from life threatening to minor. There were at least three vehicles involved; one left the scene and has been located, Geller said.

Earlier Saturday, men in combat gear — some wearing bicycle and motorcycle helmets and carrying clubs and sticks and makeshift shields — had fought each other in the downtown streets, with little apparent police interference. Both sides sprayed each other with chemical irritants and plastic bottles were hurled through the air.

A large contingent of Charlottesville police officers and Virginia State Police troopers in riot gear were stationed on side streets and at nearby barricades but did nothing to break up the melee until around 11:40 a.m.

Using megaphones, police declared an unlawful assembly and gave a five-minute warning to leave Emancipation Park, They were met by equal numbers of counterprotesters, including clergy, Black Lives Matter activists and Princeton professor Cornel West.

“The worst part is that people got hurt and the police stood by and didn’t do a ******* thing,” said David Copper, 70, of Staunton, Va.

State Del. David Toscano (D-Charlottesville), minority leader of Virginia’s House, praised the response by Charlottesville and state police.

“Things were getting out of hand in the skirmishes between the alt-right and what I would describe as the outside agitators who wanted to encourage violence,” Toscano said.

Asked why police did not act sooner to intervene as violence unfolded, Toscano said he could not comment. But they trained very hard for this and it might have been that they were waiting for a more effective time to get people out” of Emancipation Park, he said.

A group of three dozen self-described “militia” men, who were wearing full camouflage and were armed with long guns, said they were there to help keep the peace, but they also did not break up the fights.

There were vicious clashes on Market Street in front of Emancipation Park, where the rally was to begin at noon. A large contingent of white nationalist rallygoers holding shields and swinging wooden clubs rushed through a line of counterprotesters.

By 11 a.m., several fully armed militias and hundreds of right-wing rallygoers had poured into the small downtown park that was to be the site of the rally.

Counterprotesters held “Black Lives Matter” signs and placards expressing support for equality and love as they faced rallygoers who waved Confederate flags and posters that said “the Goyim know,” referring to non-Jewish people, and “the Jewish media is going down.”

“No Trump! No KKK! No fascist USA!” the counterprotesters chanted.

“Too late, f-----s!” a man yelled back at them.

Naundi Cook, 23, said she was scared during the morning protests. Cook, who is black, said she came to “support her people,” but she’s never seen something like this before.

When violence broke out, she started shaking and got goose bumps.

“I’ve seen people walking around with tear gas all over their face all over their clothes. People getting maced, fighting,” she said. “I didn’t want to be next.”

Cook said she couldn’t sit back and watch white nationalists descend on her town. She has a three-year-old daughter to stand up for, she said.

“Right now, I’m not sad,” she said once the protests dispersed. “I’m a little more empowered. All these people and support, I feel like we’re on top right now because of all the support that we have.”

After police ordered everyone to vacate the park, columns of white nationalists marched out, carrying Confederate and Nazi flags as they headed down Market Street in an odd parade. Counterprotesters lined the sidewalks and shouted epithets and mocked the group as they walked by. At various points along the route, skirmishes broke out and shouting matches ensued.

Charlottesville officials, concerned about crowds and safety issues, had tried to move the rally to a larger park away from the city’s downtown. But Jason Kessler, the rally’s organizer, filed a successful lawsuit against the city that was supported by the Virginia ACLU, saying that his First Amendment rights would be violated by moving the rally.

Tensions began Friday night, as several hundred white supremacists chanted “White lives matter!” “You will not replace us!” and “Jews will not replace us!” as they carried torches marched in a parade through the University of Virginia campus.

The fast-paced march was made up almost exclusively of men in their 20s and 30s, though there were some who looked to be in their midteens.

Meanwhile, hundreds of counterprotesters packed a church to pray and organize. A small group of counterprotesters clashed with the marchers shortly before 10 p.m. at the base of a statue of Thomas Jefferson, U-Va.’ s founder.

One counterprotester apparently deployed a chemical spray, which affected the eyes of a dozen or so marchers. It left them floundering and seeking medical assistance.

Police officers who had been keeping a wary eye on the march jumped in and broke up the fights. The marchers then disbanded, though several remained and were treated by police and medical personnel for the effects of the mace attack. It was not clear if any one was arrested.

Saturday’s Unite the Right rally was being held to protest the planned removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. The city of Charlottesville voted to remove the statue earlier this year, but it remains in the Emacipation Park, formerly known as Lee Park, pending a judge’s ruling expected later this month.

Play Video 1:08
At least 1 dead and 19 injured after clashes at white nationalist gathering

A car plowed into crowds at a white nationalist gathering in Charlottesville on Aug. 12, killing one person and injuring 19 others. (Photo: Evelyn Hockstein/The Washington Post)
By Joe Heim, Ellie Silverman, T. Rees Shapiro and Emma Brown
August 12 at 4:12 PM
CHARLOTTESVILLE — A chaotic and violent day turned to tragedy Saturday as hundreds of white nationalists, neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members — planning to stage what they described as their largest rally in decades to “take America back” — clashed with counterprotesters in the streets and a car plowed into crowds, killing one person and injuring 19 others.

Angela Taylor, a spokeswoman for UVA Medical Center, said 20 people were brought to the hospital in the early afternooon after three cars collided in a pedestrian mall packed with people. One died and the rest incurred injuries ranging from life-threatening to minor. Another 15 people were injured during street brawls, city officials said.

Earlier, police had evacuated a downtown park as rallygoers and counterprotesters traded blows and hurled bottles and chemical irritants at one another, putting an end to the noon rally before it even began.


Gov. Terry McAuliffe declared a state of emergency shortly before 11 a.m., saying he was “disgusted by the hatred, bigotry and violence” and blaming “mostly out-of-state protesters.”


Tensions rise as white nationalists gather for a rally in Charlottesville, Va.
View Photos White nationalists hold a Unite the Right rally, a gathering of groups whose members have said they are being persecuted for being white and that white history in America is being erased, in Charlottesville after torch-bearing protesters marched through the University of Virginia campus the night before.
Despite the decision to quash the rally, clashes continued on side streets and throughout the downtown. In the early afternoon, three cars collided in a pedestrian mall at Water and Fourth Streets, sending bystanders running and screaming. It was unclear if it was accidental or intentional.

“I am heartbroken that a life has been lost here,” said Charlottesville Mayor Michael Signer in a tweet. “I urge all people of good will--go home.”

Elected leaders in Virginia and elsewhere urged peace, blasting the white supremacist views on display in Charlottesville as ugly. U.S. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) called their display “repugnant.”


But President Trump, known for the rapid-fire tweets, remained silent throughout the morning. It was after 1 p.m. when he weighed in, writing on Twitter: “We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!”

At a late-afternoon news conference to discuss veterans’ health care, Trump said that he was following the events in Charlottesville closely. “The hate and the division must stop and must stop right now,” Trump said, without specifically mentioning white nationalists or their views. “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides. On many sides,” he said.

Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, a Trump supporter who was in Charlottesville Saturday, quickly shot back at the president. “So, after decades of White Americans being targeted for discriminated & anti-White hatred, we come together as a people, and you attack us?” Duke tweeted. “I would recommend you take a good look in the mirror & remember it was White Americans who put you in the presidency, not radical leftists.”


Dozens of the white nationalists in Charlottesville were wearing red Make America Great Again hats. Asked by a reporter in New Jersey whether he wanted the support of white nationalists, Trump did not respond.


By early afternoon, hundreds of rallygoers had made their way from Emancipation Park — where they had expected to protest the planned removal of a Confederate statue — to a larger park two miles to the north. Duke, speaking to the crowd, called Saturday’s events “the first step toward taking America back.”

“The truth is European Americans face tremendous discrimination in this country — jobs, scholarships, promotions,” Duke said. “The truth is we are being ethnically cleansed within our own nation.”

White nationalist leader Richard Spencer also addressed the group, urging people to disperse. But he promised that they would gather again for a future demonstration, blaming Saturday’s violence on counterprotesters.

Even as crowds began to thin, the town remained unsettled and on edge. Onlookers were deeply shaken at the pedestrian mall, where ambulances had arrived to treat victims of the car crash.


Susie McClannahan, 24, said counterprotesters were marching on Fourth Street when she saw a “silver gray vehicle” drive through the crowd, and then immediately shift into reverse in what she described as full speed.

“Everyone was in shock and all of a sudden we heard people scream get to the wall because the driver was backing up,” McClannahan said. She said those closest to the accident ran to those injured in the street.

“I didn’t want to believe it was real. It was just so horrible,” she said.

Hunter Harmon, 20, saw people “flung” in the air after they were hit by a car and he heard others screaming.

“We were marching and next to each other and all of a sudden I just heard a bunch of bangs and I saw a bunch of people flying through the air and people injured on the ground,” Harmon said.

Corinne Geller, a spokeswoman for the Virginia State Police said there were multiple injuries ranging from life threatening to minor. There were at least three vehicles involved; one left the scene and has been located, Geller said.

[Decades before Charlottesville, the Ku Klux Klan was dead. The first Hollywood blockbuster revived it.]

Earlier Saturday, men in combat gear — some wearing bicycle and motorcycle helmets and carrying clubs and sticks and makeshift shields — had fought each other in the downtown streets, with little apparent police interference. Both sides sprayed each other with chemical irritants and plastic bottles were hurled through the air.

A large contingent of Charlottesville police officers and Virginia State Police troopers in riot gear were stationed on side streets and at nearby barricades but did nothing to break up the melee until around 11:40 a.m.

Using megaphones, police declared an unlawful assembly and gave a five-minute warning to leave Emancipation Park, They were met by equal numbers of counterprotesters, including clergy, Black Lives Matter activists and Princeton professor Cornel West.

“The worst part is that people got hurt and the police stood by and didn’t do a ******* thing,” said David Copper, 70, of Staunton, Va.

State Del. David Toscano (D-Charlottesville), minority leader of Virginia’s House, praised the response by Charlottesville and state police.

“Things were getting out of hand in the skirmishes between the alt-right and what I would describe as the outside agitators who wanted to encourage violence,” Toscano said.

Asked why police did not act sooner to intervene as violence unfolded, Toscano said he could not comment. But they trained very hard for this and it might have been that they were waiting for a more effective time to get people out” of Emancipation Park, he said.

A group of three dozen self-described “militia” men, who were wearing full camouflage and were armed with long guns, said they were there to help keep the peace, but they also did not break up the fights.

There were vicious clashes on Market Street in front of Emancipation Park, where the rally was to begin at noon. A large contingent of white nationalist rallygoers holding shields and swinging wooden clubs rushed through a line of counterprotesters.

By 11 a.m., several fully armed militias and hundreds of right-wing rallygoers had poured into the small downtown park that was to be the site of the rally.

Counterprotesters held “Black Lives Matter” signs and placards expressing support for equality and love as they faced rallygoers who waved Confederate flags and posters that said “the Goyim know,” referring to non-Jewish people, and “the Jewish media is going down.”

“No Trump! No KKK! No fascist USA!” the counterprotesters chanted.

“Too late, f-----s!” a man yelled back at them.

Naundi Cook, 23, said she was scared during the morning protests. Cook, who is black, said she came to “support her people,” but she’s never seen something like this before.

When violence broke out, she started shaking and got goose bumps.

“I’ve seen people walking around with tear gas all over their face all over their clothes. People getting maced, fighting,” she said. “I didn’t want to be next.”

Cook said she couldn’t sit back and watch white nationalists descend on her town. She has a three-year-old daughter to stand up for, she said.

“Right now, I’m not sad,” she said once the protests dispersed. “I’m a little more empowered. All these people and support, I feel like we’re on top right now because of all the support that we have.”

After police ordered everyone to vacate the park, columns of white nationalists marched out, carrying Confederate and Nazi flags as they headed down Market Street in an odd parade. Counterprotesters lined the sidewalks and shouted epithets and mocked the group as they walked by. At various points along the route, skirmishes broke out and shouting matches ensued.

Charlottesville officials, concerned about crowds and safety issues, had tried to move the rally to a larger park away from the city’s downtown. But Jason Kessler, the rally’s organizer, filed a successful lawsuit against the city that was supported by the Virginia ACLU, saying that his First Amendment rights would be violated by moving the rally.

Tensions began Friday night, as several hundred white supremacists chanted “White lives matter!” “You will not replace us!” and “Jews will not replace us!” as they carried torches marched in a parade through the University of Virginia campus.

The fast-paced march was made up almost exclusively of men in their 20s and 30s, though there were some who looked to be in their midteens.

Meanwhile, hundreds of counterprotesters packed a church to pray and organize. A small group of counterprotesters clashed with the marchers shortly before 10 p.m. at the base of a statue of Thomas Jefferson, U-Va.’ s founder.

One counterprotester apparently deployed a chemical spray, which affected the eyes of a dozen or so marchers. It left them floundering and seeking medical assistance.

Police officers who had been keeping a wary eye on the march jumped in and broke up the fights. The marchers then disbanded, though several remained and were treated by police and medical personnel for the effects of the mace attack. It was not clear if any one was arrested.

Saturday’s Unite the Right rally was being held to protest the planned removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. The city of Charlottesville voted to remove the statue earlier this year, but it remains in the Emacipation Park, formerly known as Lee Park, pending a judge’s ruling expected later this month.

Must Reads
5 stories you can't afford to miss, every Saturday.
Sign up
Saturday marked the second time in six weeks that Charlottesville has faced a protest from white supremacist groups for its decision to remove the statue. On July 8, about three dozen members of a regional Ku Klux Klan group protested in the city.

The torchlight parade drew sharp condemnations from Charlottesville Mayor Mike Signer and U-Va. President Teresa Sullivan.

Sullivan described herself as “deeply saddened and disturbed by the hateful behavior”shown by the marchers.

Signer said he was “beyond disgusted by this unsanctioned and despicable display of visual intimidation on a college campus.” He called the chanting procession a “cowardly parade of hatred, bigotry, racism, and intolerance.”

Sarah Larimer contributed to this report

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...5fb636-7f13-11e7-83c7-5bd5460f0d7e_story.html
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Beginning?

I knew about his antics back in the 80s, then he was a character in wrestling, can you imagine Ike being involved in entertainment wrestling? He is more an entertainer than a politician.

Headdrassed bombing North Korea in 1999. He said we had to pay attention to then, here he was right. At least he reacted to the Charlottesville riot, although not to the sanctification of some liberals. Do we know who used a car as a weapon?
 

exminister

Well-known member
I knew about his antics back in the 80s, then he was a character in wrestling, can you imagine Ike being involved in entertainment wrestling? He is more an entertainer than a politician.

Headdrassed bombing North Korea in 1999. He said we had to pay attention to then, here he was right. At least he reacted to the Charlottesville riot, although not to the sanctification of some liberals. Do we know who used a car as a weapon?

This has a video of the car running into the anti-KKK crowd. That would lead you to believe it was alt-right.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/12/16138900/charlottesville-va-car-crash
 

RealityJerk

New member
Trump isn't the anti-establishment rebel, many portray him to be. I believe he's swimming in the swamp, with everybody else. The establishment, the corrupt cabal of politicians in Washington, want America to maintain an adversarial foreign policy towards Russia. That's stupid. Dumb. Why should we continue, expanding NATO into Russia's backyard, its sphere of influence, and pretend that we're in a position to lecture Russia about its supposed militarism and interference in the internal, political affairs of other nations? Do we really have the moral high ground to be lecturing Russia on militarism and how it shouldn't be interfering in Ukraine and Syria, when we have over 800 military bases in more than 70 countries around the world?

We invaded Iraq, under the pretext of getting rid of its WMDs, and created a vast power vacuum, that was replaced with a government that is in bed with Iran, and with radical Islamic terrorists, the likes of ISIS and others. Iran has more influence now in Iraq than it's had for centuries. In our attempt to "fix" Iraq, we made the situation there worse. Same with Libya. We tried to "fix" Libya, by force, by sponsoring a civil war. We provided the Islamic radicals of Libya, with arms, through our Arab allies, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and provided them with logistical and air support. We had an aircraft carrier, launching sorties into Libya, right off the Libyan coast. We supported the so called "freedom fighters" in Libya, and now that country is a mess. Chaos. ISIS is taking over Libya, and the Libyan government is being run by a bunch of corrupt, incompetent western puppets. The country is literally in a catastrophic state, economically and otherwise. It's a ruined country, thanks to our need to "fix" the world.

We then sponsored the "Arab Spring", and got rid of Mubarak in Egypt, replacing him with the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Egyptian people weren't going to have it. They rebelled against the Muslim Brotherhood and replaced it with a government, much like the one they had before, with Mubarak.

Syria, another mess, we're now involved in. We're trying to "fix" Syria and that's not going to work. Ukraine, we also funded, sponsored that revolution, replacing the legally, democratically elected governm
ent of Yanukovych, with a svoboda party run government, comprised of literally, right wing fascists. The svoboda party supported Hitler, during the second world war and maintains a very hostile stance towards Russia and consequently, towards Russians as well.

The south east region of Ukraine, including Creamia, is mostly populated by ethnic Russians, who speak and identify as ethnically Russian. That's what started the conflict, between the new svoboda run government and the eastern "Donbas" region of Ukraine.

This is right on Russia's border. Creamia was part of Russia, for centuries. That's why the people there are mostly, ethnically Russian. How can we, as America, insist, that Russia is being militaristic, interfering in the affairs of other countries, when Russia is simply defending its regional interests? Think about it, how would we like it as Americans, if Russia was spreading a military alliance, established during the cold war, to fight the United States, into Mexico and Canada? Mexico and Canada, join this Russian led military alliance, and agree to deploy Russian mssiles, right on our border. We wouldn't allow it. We'd go to war with Russia, Mexico and Canada, if that happened. We've been poking the bear, unnecessarily, with NATO, for years.

What happened to the golden rule? Don't do unto others, what you don't want done to you? Very simple. Trump supposedly, wasn't going to continue with the saber rattling and the warmongering. Our obsession with "regime change", "fixing" other countries, by ousting their governments and replacing them with something worse. He promised, he wouldn't continue with that type of foreign policy. The truth is, he is. Basically, it's the same poopoo. We should seek better relations with Russia and just focus on destroying ISIS. Stop trying to replace Assad, with something else.

North Korea, that's a unique situation. We can't allow that bloated chipmunk, to acquire ICBMs, capable of hitting the United States mainland. We have to do something about that. We should play it smart. This is a job for the CIA. Before we get into a war with North Korea, and possibly China and Russia, as a consequence, leading to a third world war. We should try to establish a network of agents in North Korea, that will "dispatch" the chipmunk.
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
Hey RJ, you might want to rethink the extra large font if you're going to post that length. Now onto the notions.

Trump isn't the anti-establishment rebel, many portray him to be.

Anyone who bought into the idea of a rich old white guy being a rebel deserves their disappointment.

I believe he's swimming in the swamp, with everybody else. The establishment, the corrupt cabal of politicians in Washington, want America to maintain an adversarial foreign policy towards Russia. That's stupid. Dumb.
Depends on the Russians. If they're getting expansionist again and meddling in our political process they're making themselves the enemy.

Why should we continue, expanding NATO into Russia's backyard, its sphere of influence, and pretend that we're in a position to lecture Russia about its supposed militarism and interference in the internal, political affairs of other nations?
Because we aren't absorbing these people against their will, for one thing. We're protecting their right to autonomy.

Do we really have the moral high ground to be lecturing Russia on militarism and how it shouldn't be interfering in Ukraine and Syria, when we have over 800 military bases in more than 70 countries around the world?
Yes. We have leases and the nations where we have those bases want us there, with the exception of Cuba.

You seem to think all killing is murder, to analogize. It isn't.

We invaded Iraq, under the pretext of getting rid of its WMDs, and created a vast power vacuum, that was replaced with a government that is in bed with Iran, and with radical Islamic terrorists, the likes of ISIS and others.
See, that's one way you know we aren't in the nation gobbling business. You think Russia would take something for any reason then give it back to the people? That said, our foreign policy with the Middle East has been muddled at best and incompetent as a rule. You won't get any argument from me on that point.

This is right on Russia's border. Creamia was part of Russia, for centuries. That's why the people there are mostly, ethnically Russian. How can we, as America, insist, that Russia is being militaristic, interfering in the affairs of other countries, when Russia is simply defending its regional interests?
Probably because they're attempting to foment revolution where they aren't more directly involved in carving a piece of a country out for themselves where they never did when it was in their orbit.

Think about it, how would we like it as Americans, if Russia was spreading a military alliance, established during the cold war, to fight the United States, into Mexico and Canada?
NATO was formed to protect its membership against the potential for Soviet aggression, not to attempt to invade the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was busy fomenting revolution and threat, including the placement of nuclear weapons just off our southern shore.

What happened to the golden rule?
It's still there. You have a rosy pair of lenses you're viewing the former Soviets and their KGB leader through.

North Korea, that's a unique situation. We can't allow that bloated chipmunk, to acquire ICBMs, capable of hitting the United States mainland. We have to do something about that. We should play it smart. This is a job for the CIA. Before we get into a war with North Korea, and possibly China and Russia, as a consequence, leading to a third world war. We should try to establish a network of agents in North Korea, that will "dispatch" the chipmunk.
No one wants a nuclear war over that knuckle head. China has essentially said it. They just don't want us committing a first strike. The answer is easy enough. Agree, but tell the Chinese that they'll have to assume responsibility for precluding the strike to end NK's chances of developing and using a nuclear weapon against us.

In other words, if they're going to insist we wait until the other guy lobs one at us they're not really different from someone holding you down for another guy to rob. If they want us to hold off they have to do something about it themselves. It's your backyard? Fine. Take care of your back yard.
 

RealityJerk

New member
Hey RJ, you might want to rethink the extra large font if you're going to post that length. Now onto the notions.


Anyone who bought into the idea of a rich old white guy being a rebel deserves their disappointment.


Depends on the Russians. If they're getting expansionist again and meddling in our political process they're making themselves the enemy.


Because we aren't absorbing these people against their will, for one thing. We're protecting their right to autonomy.


Yes. We have leases and the nations where we have those bases want us there, with the exception of Cuba.

You seem to think all killing is murder, to analogize. It isn't.


See, that's one way you know we aren't in the nation gobbling business. You think Russia would take something for any reason then give it back to the people? That said, our foreign policy with the Middle East has been muddled at best and incompetent as a rule. You won't get any argument from me on that point.


Probably because they're attempting to foment revolution where they aren't more directly involved in carving a piece of a country out for themselves where they never did when it was in their orbit.


NATO was formed to protect its membership against the potential for Soviet aggression, not to attempt to invade the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was busy fomenting revolution and threat, including the placement of nuclear weapons just off our southern shore.


It's still there. You have a rosy pair of lenses you're viewing the former Soviets and their KGB leader through.


No one wants a nuclear war over that knuckle head. China has essentially said it. They just don't want us committing
a first strike. The answer is easy enough. Agree, but tell the Chinese that they'll have to assume responsibility for precluding the strike to end NK's chances of developing and using a nuclear weapon against us.

In other words, if they're going to insist we wait until the other guy lobs one at us they're not really different from someone holding you down for another guy to rob. If they want us to hold off they have to do something about it themselves. It's your backyard? Fine. Take care of your back yard.


It was our government that fermented the fires of civil strife, revolution, violence, in Ukraine, after the legally elected, legitimate government of Ukraine, rejected a free-trade agreement with the EU, opting for a 13 billion dollar economic aid package and free trade agreement with the Russian Federation. The EU and Washington didn't like that because they were hoping that Ukraine would eventually join NATO.

You're griping about what? Are you serious? Russia's supposed meddling in our last presidential election? Are you for real? Do you actually
believe Hillary lost the election because of Russia? And even if that is correct, what moral high ground do we have to condemn Russia, for trying to influence our presidential election? We do it all the time. For example, I don't have to go any further back than Ukraine. McCain and other American government officials, went to Ukraine to cheerlead and like I mentioned earlier, ferment, fan, the fires of civil strife.

What occured in Ukraine, was an American sponsored coup
d'etat. Our government funds the NGOs, like "Foundation For Democracy" and others, organizing and creating opposition, street demonstrations, against the governments, we don't like. That's just as bad, if not worse, than the Russian government releasing damaging information about Hillary.

The Hillary campaign, sent its campaign officials to meet with the Ukrainian government, to see if it had any dirt on Trump. Yet Russia releasing dirt on Hillary, to influence the American public is supposedly a (((GREAT CRIME))). When we go to another country to topple its government or sponsor a revolution, a coup, its OK, but when the Russian government releases some dirt on Hillary, OH, THOSE EVIL RUSSIANS. Lets sanction Russia..etc. Its absurd.

NATO was formed in 1949, to "stop" a Soviet invasion of western Europe and the Soviets formed the Warsaw Pact in 55, in response to NATO. NATO and the Warsaw Pact, were rivals, for almost 40 years. Just like we wouldn't like it if Mexico or/and Canada were joining the "Warsaw Pact", and deploying missiles on its borders with our country, they don't want us spreading NATO into their neighborhood/region of the world/sphere of influence, namely Eastern Europe and deploying missiles on their border.

We would be incensed and declaring war on Russia, Mexico, and Canada. We wouldn't allow that. We can supposedly do it to Russia, but of course, they can't do it to us. There's a clear double standard there. And yes, I know the Warsaw Pact, doesn't exist anymore. I'm using that as an example, an illustration.

As far as the Soviets deploying or trying to deploy missiles in Cuba. We had missiles in Turkey at the time, and that's what led to the Soviet Union, trying to deploy missiles 90 miles south of Key West. We did it to them, and they did it to us. We took our missiles out of Turkey and the Russians stopped their effort to deploy missiles in Cuba.

As far as Cuba, we got rid of Batista, replacing him with Fidel Castro. The US government armed Castro and his ragtag communist guerillas, when they were fighting the Cuban government in the Sierra Madre mountains. They were receiving arms, food, medicine, sent from a secret US government CIA airstrip in South Florida. All of this information has been declassified and released to the public through the Freedom Of Information Act. After Fidel took power, he turned on his American handlers, biting the hand that armed and fed him, when he was in the jungle, fighting the Cuban government. He went with the Soviets.

That's called "blowback". The unintended consequences, of meddling in the internal affairs of other countries, especially when that meddling involves, violence. War. When we arm one faction vs another, to eliminate a government, forcing "regime change", that almost always makes the situation worse. Worse conditions, that existed before we intervened and tried to "fix" things through, fermenting violence, the force of arms, invading other countries..etc.

The reason we expanded NATO into Eastern Europe, was to weaken and surround Russia, militarily, economically..etc. It's not to stop a Russian invasion of Eastern Europe or Eastern European migration to western Europe. The migration we see now from the Muslim world is due to all of the violence, civil strife, that our foreign policy has created in Iraq, Libya and Syria. We create the conditions for refugees, and when those refugees seek safety in Europe or America, we gripe about how backward the Muslims are, and how they can't supposedly manage their own countries. Well, let's stop trying to "fix" and "manage" their countries and perhaps they'll be able to live a better life in their own countries. We screw up their country, and when they come to ours, we cry "foul!" and do everything possible to demonize, demean and dehumanize them, when all they're doing is trying to survive.

Don't do unto others, what you don't want done to you. Americans who push for American interventionism abroad and regime change, are part of the problem.

 
Last edited:

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
Russia's supposed meddling in our last presidential election? Are you for real? Do you actually believe Hillary lost the election because of Russia?

Different questions with different answers. Yes, I absolutely believe that Russia meddled in our election. So do people in Washington who hate to agree with one another and who have seen the intelligence. And no, that's not why Hillary, who I didn't want to win either, lost. She lost because she couldn't quite generate the numbers Obama did and because our EC handed her one at odds with the popular vote, for the second time in a short while, sparking another discussion about the EC and what it really accomplishes for the Republic.

And even if that is correct, what moral
high ground do we have to condemn Russia, for trying to influence our presidential election?

It isn't about moral high ground. It's about self interest and keeping foreign governments from interfering with our process.

We do it all the time. For example, I don't have to go any further back than Ukraine. McCain and other American government officials, went to Ukraine to cheerlead and like I mentioned earlier, ferment, fan, the fires of civil strife.
Even accepting your reading for arguments sake there's a huge difference between public endorsement and a covert campaign to use disinformation in an attempt to influence the winner of our election.

But again, this isn't a high ground argument, it's a clear self-interest one. We have a vested interest in keeping Putin's thumb off our scales. Every nation should protect the legitimacy of its process. Russia included.

Yet Russia releasing dirt on Hillary, to influence the American public is supposedly a (((GREAT CRIME))).
Yes, it's criminal for a foreign government to mount a disinformation effort in order to alter our electoral outcome. That's the bottom line.

When we go to another country to topple its government or sponsor a revolution, a coup, its OK
It's at least in our best interests as we perceive them. Politics on the world stage is fairly Darwinian. I think the answer is case by case in relation to our interests and principles. I'll come back to it in a moment.

, but when the Russian government releases some dirt on Hillary, OH, THOSE EVIL RUSSIANS. Lets sanction Russia..etc. Its absurd.
You appear to want to play the moral equivalence card. It's more like this: every government on some level is gaming every other. When you're caught at it there's a penalty phase. And dirt is a bit different from disinformation specifically exported to rig an election.

NATO was formed in 1949, to "stop" a Soviet invasion of western Europe and the Soviets formed the Warsaw Pact in 55, in response to NATO.
Rather, when it became clear that Russia would take its communist revolution world wide in short order NATO was formed. The puppet nonsense of the Warsaw Pact was just that. Those weren't independent nations banding together in anticipation of a Western invasion. That was the master Russia playing a fledgling PR stunt. You don't need an alliance to thwart a defensive pact, do you.

As far as the Soviets deploying or trying to deploy missiles in Cuba.
Deployed. And I know we had missiles in Turkey. But your timeline is missing something. Castro declared Cuba a Russian training camp for revolution prior to our placement of missiles in Turkey. You could say the gist was, "Okay, you're going to set up a revolutionary export center in our hemisphere, we're going to place nuclear missiles on your doorstep."

The missile exchange was part of the larger message board between the USSR and the USA.

As far as Cuba, we got rid of Batista, replacing him with Fidel Castro.
Batista was a horror and in the pocket of the mob. We simply chose the wrong horse to undo that fiasco. We were timid when we should have been bold if we felt the necessity of it, as we appeared to. Another policy gaff on our part.

That's called "blowback". The unintended consequences, of meddling in the internal affairs of other countries
especially when that meddling involves, violence. War.

If only it was that cut and dried, but you could say that's what we did in WWII and Europe.

The reason we expanded NATO into Eastern Europe, was to weaken and surround Russia, militarily, economically..etc. It's not to stop a Russian invasion of Eastern Europe or Eastern European migration to western Europe.
Surround them why, again? We weren't going to invade the USSR. We were restraining a former ally who had declared its intention to bury us and the West's way of life. And the Berlin Wall answers your notion about migration.

The migration we see now from the Muslim world is due to all of the violence, civil strife, that our foreign policy has created in Iraq, Libya and Syria.
The problem of the Middle East goes back to the world wars and how their lands were turned into resources for foreign powers when they weren't out right seized. On our foreign policy, in the bit you block quoted (aka, my entire post) I noted my position on that. You must have missed it in route.

Well, let's stop trying to "fix" and "manage" their countries
It's a case by case. If we can stop a genocide we should. If we feel obligated to protect our interests abroad and compelled by circumstance we have to consider it. Every nation will. I tend to value our Republic above the competition and the cultural tariffs much of it uses to keep our export out.
 

RealityJerk

New member

Different questions with different answers. Yes, I absolutely believe that Russia meddled in our election. So do people in Washington who hate to agree with one another and who have seen the intelligence. And no, that's not why Hillary, who I didn't want to win either, lost. She lost because she couldn't quite generate the numbers Obama did and because our EC handed her one at odds with the popular vote, for the second time in a short while, sparking another discussion about the EC and what it really accomplishes for the Republic.


It isn't about moral high ground. It's about self interest and keeping foreign governments from interfering with our process.


Even accepting your reading for arguments sake there's a huge difference between public endorsement and a covert campaign to use disinformation in an attempt to influence the winner of our election.

But again, this isn't a high ground argument, it's a clear self-interest one. We have a vested interest in keeping Putin's thumb off our scales. Every nation should protect the legitimacy of its process. Russia included.


Yes, it's criminal for a foreign government to mount a disinformation effort in order to alter our electoral outcome. That's the bottom line.


It's at least in our best interests as we perceive them. Politics on the world stage is fairly Darwinian. I think the answer is case by case in relation to our interests and principles. I'll come back to it in a moment.


You appear to want to play the moral equivalence card. It's more like this: every government on some level is gaming every other. When you're caught at it there's a penalty phase. And dirt is a bit different from disinformation specifically exported to rig an election.


Rather, when it became clear that Russia would take its communist revolution world wide in short order NATO was formed. The puppet nonsense of the Warsaw Pact was just that. Those weren't independent nations banding together in anticipation of a Western invasion. That was the master Russia playing a fledgling PR stunt. You don't need an alliance to thwart a defensive pact, do you.


Deployed. And I know we had missiles in Turkey. But your timeline is missing something. Castro declared Cuba a Russian training camp for revolution prior to our placement of missiles in Turkey. You could say the gist was, "Okay, you're going to set up a revolutionary export center in our hemisphere, we're going to place nuclear missiles on your doorstep."

The missile exchange was part of the larger message board between the USSR and the USA.


Batista was a horror and in the pocket of the mob. We simply chose the wrong horse to undo that fiasco. We were timid when we should have been bold if we felt the necessity of it, as we appeared to. Another policy gaff on our part.


If only it was that cut and dried, but you could say that's what we did in WWII and Europe.


Surround them why, again? We weren't going to invade the USSR. We were restraining a former ally who had declared its intention to bury us and the West's way of life. And the Berlin Wall answers your notion about migration.


The problem of the Middle East goes back to the world wars and how their lands were turned into resources for foreign powers when they weren't out right seized. On our foreign policy, in the bit you block quoted (aka, my entire post) I noted my position on that. You must have missed it in route.


It's a case by case. If we can stop a genocide we should. If we feel obligated to protect our interests abroad and compelled by circumstance we have to consider it. Every nation will. I tend to value our Republic above the competition and the cultural tariffs much of it uses to keep our export out.


The CIA, none of our other intelligence services, has presented any conclusive evidence on the question of Russian meddling in our last presidential election. You claim that the Wikileak emails are "misinformation"? In what way? The Democrats who were involved and mentioned in the released emails, admit that they're real emails and what is being said is true. So if Russia supposedly released that intelligence to the American public, perhaps we should thank them? That's different than, Russia funding NGOs in the United States to start violent street demonstrations, riots, and sending Russian government officials to the United States, to give speeches to the rioters. That's essentially what the US did in Ukraine.

The degree of "meddling" that the US government engages in, is much more destructive, than for example, perhaps just simply, releasing some dirt on corrupt Russian politicians, during a Russian presidential election. Is that provocative? Yes. Is it equivalent to actively, intentionally, starting and sponsoring a violent uprising in Russia? No. Only a very confused. deluded mind would equate the two.

The problems we're dealing with now in Libya, Syria and Iraq, are not the consequence of WW1 or 2. It's due to our "manifest destiny", jingoist obsession with "fixing the world". We shouldn't have invaded Iraq, we shouldn't have eliminated Qaddafi in Libya, Mubarak in Egypt, nor now Assad in Syria. If we're really concerned with "saving" people from "evil dictators", we can start with Saudi Arabia, led by an absolute monarch, that beheads people for religious apostasy. Women can't even drive in Saudi Arabia. I don't know perhaps that's good? Women not driving.

Spreading NATO into Russia's neighborhood, their region of influence, and deploying missiles on their border, is not a very good idea. We wouldn't want them doing that to us, so we shouldn't do it to them. It's common sense, unless you're one of these deluded jingoist Americans, the manifest destiny, American imperialist types, that don't care what their government does around the world, to those "other people". Often those other people, look different than the average American Anglo, and are considered inferior, in every way, hence their suffering and human rights aren't as important, as us white folks here in America. Let them suffer for "our interests". Our supposed national interests.

As far as Cuba. Replacing Batista with a communist dictator, made the situation in Cuba worse for everyone, including my family. I'm a Cuban American, US army veteran (don't get confused). Batista was no angel, but he was orders of magnitude better than Castro. Claiming that it's in our "national interest" to engage in these regime change "projects" around the world, starting coups and wars, is ridiculous. It practically always, ends with more pain and suffering for everyone, including our country.

Can there be a situation, where its in our national interest to violently get rid of a foreign leader. Rarely. In general, its not in our best interest, its only perhaps in the interest of the military industrial complex, and certain financial interests. Politicians who want to expand their portfolios and get some election campaign money from certain companies, may constantly saber rattle and push for conflict, around the world, in our supposed "national interest". It's really in their perceived, personal interest, as power hungry politicians. Corrupt politicians and the Americans who support them, like yourself for example, with your nihilistic "Darwinian, survival of the fittest" drivel. Skewed notion of patriotism and what's actually in our "national interest".

Don't do unto others, what you don't want done to you. Very simple, cosmic law. Yes, it's that cut and dry. We pretend it's not in order to justify what we're doing, but it's really not complicated at all.
 
Last edited:

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
The CIA, none of our other intelligence services, has presented any conclusive evidence on the question of Russian meddling in our last presidential election.
That's not true, of course. For instance, the hacking of the DNC and its trail to Russia was confirmed by independent firms within our country. The FBI has been involved in procuring information on their activities within our country and the CIA, as it should, has been following the action outside our borders. That much we know. What the members of Congress have been privy to has led them, Republican and Democrat alike, to the same conclusion.

Here's a link to a pretty good job of putting together a time line on the topic by the Washington Post.

A couple of highlights. In August prior to the election the CIA produced a report with information from deep sources within Moscow a directive by Putin to damage the Clinton campaign. A combined NSA, CIA and FBI task force is formed. It's interesting reading.

You claim that the Wikileak emails are "misinformation"?
I don't believe I've said anything about Wikileaks. So stop with the misinformation.

So if Russia supposedly released that intelligence to the American public, perhaps we should thank them?
Of course that's not what we're really talking about or the extent of Russian involvement. Again, when a foreign power clandestinely breaks the law to spread disinformation and influence the outcome of our electoral system, a thank you isn't what we owe them.

That's different than, Russia funding NGOs in the United States to start violence street demonstrations, riots, and sending Russian government officials to the United States, to give speeches to the rioters. That's essentially what the US did in Ukraine.
No, it isn't, which is why the case hasn't been made in the larger public square. I'm going to skip over the additional fantasy camp/Russian sponsored fairy tale attempt at building equivalency on smoke and rest on what we can actually know and what isn't a matter of self-serving speculation on the part of Moscow.

The problems we're dealing with now in Libya, Syria and Iraq, are not the consequence of WW1 or 2.
They really are if you understand the history of the region and how it was treated by the West.

It's due to our "manifest destiny", jingoist obsession with "fixing the world".
Every world power believes in its inherent virtue and desires to enlighten the rest of the world. The rest is a matter of disagreement or agreement on the part of the person who considers the effort. This nation has been both selfish and remarkably altruistic. More of the latter than former in the past few decades, sadly, and that hasn't helped anything.

We shouldn't have invaded Iraq, we shouldn't have eliminated Qaddafi in Libya, Mubarak in Egypt, nor now Assad in Syria. If we're really concerned with "saving" people from "evil dictators", we can start with Saudi Arabia, led by an absolute monarch, that beheads people for religious apostasy. Women can't even drive in Saudi Arabia. I don't know perhaps that's good? Women not driving.
Iraq was a nightmare and many in this country debate the merits of it, mostly based on the outcome and the errantly offered premise. But the harm that's come from the removal of a very evil man and regime is largely the fault of a people who refused to seize the opportunity proffered over traditional differences that same dictator had held together and silenced by unconscionable use of force and terror.


Spreading NATO into Russia's neighborhood, their region of influence, and deploying missiles on their border, is not a very good idea.
A neighborhood watch only upsets criminals and those who champion them.

We wouldn't want them doing that to us
Worse was done to us. See: Cuba and it's use as a base of operations to spread violent revolution in our hemisphere.

As far as Cuba. Replacing Batista with a communist dictator, made the situation in Cuba worse for everyone, including my family.
Well, no one here wanted to replace Batista with a communist. I've spoken to the error in that.

I'm a Cuban American, US army veteran (don't get confused).
I'll try, but it's a real Rubik's Cube of rhetorical intricacy [/sarcasm].

Batista was no angel, but he was orders of magnitude better than Castro. Claiming that its in our "national interest" to engage in these regime change "projects" around the world, starting coups and wars, is ridiculous. It practically always, ends with more pain and suffering for everyone, including our country.
Supra and prior on the replacement, but it's ridiculous to make a blanket declaration that ending certain regimes isn't and hasn't been in our interest. For instance, if we had been able to rid Cuba of Castro and played uncle to a fledgling democratic movement in Cuba. Similarly, the regime change in Japan, Germany, and Italy was a good move for the people who lived there. Now if you're talking about the Middle East, it's been a roller coaster. The worst thing we did there (and in other parts of the world) was ignore our principled interest to serve more immediate needs and, in part, as a matter of necessity in opposing the activity of your Soviet friends. But that's a long, sad, and complicated narrative. We're talking about why Russia is being hit with sanctions and why that's the right thing to do.

Can there be a situation, where its in our national interest to violently get rid of a foreign leader. Rarely. In general, its not in our best interest, its only perhaps in the interest of the military industrial complex, and certain financial interests. Politicians who want to expand their portfolios and get some election campaign money from certain companies, may constantly saber rattle and push for conflict, around the world, in our supposed "national interest". It's really in their perceived, personal interest, as power hungry politicians. Corrupt politicians and the Americans that support them, like yourself for example, with your nihilistic "Darwinian, survival of the fittest" drivel.
Man, that really wounded me. You should try more of that. It's hella convincing. [/additional sarcasm]. Rather, recognizing the truth of a thing doesn't make me the endorser or possessor of it. The larger game board for nations is fairly Darwinistic and always has been.

Don't do unto others, what you don't want done to you. Very simple, cosmic law. Yes, it is that cut and dry. We pretend its not in order to justify what we're doing, but its really not complicated at all.
Actually, the Golden Rule is a bit different. It compels action, not the withholding of it. It's one thing that makes it unique among competing ideas. Do. Not refrain from. Do unto others what you would have them do unto you. Care for the sick, protect the weak, defend the downtrodden. Because if you were sick, weak, and beaten, you'd want that help. I wouldn't have them allow me to be raped, tortured, to have my rights as a human being taken from me, etc. That's what the regime in Iraq was doing and worse. The more legitimate criticism of my government is that it hasn't been true to our own principles in combating that sort of evil, has too often in the name of political expediency or necessity turned a blind eye or worse.

And any criticism of that, of failing our own principles, is one good for the Republic. But it's not this one. Here the subject is another empire, one demonstrably less concerned with those principles we value as a people, caught with its hands in our process and the just response to that effort.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top