That article from asch.org is a very good one. Thomas Sowell goes into this pretty deeply in some of his books. He shows exactly how the left uses statistics to "prove" that which is absolutely false. They are past masters of it, but more and more people are waking up to the fact that there are "lies, d a m n lies, and then there are statistics". Sowell's books are an excellent exposè on this kind of deception. He lays it bare for all to see.
U.S influence in the world drops to new low
- Thread starter The Barbarian
- Start date
That article from asch.org is a very good one. Thomas Sowell goes into this pretty deeply in some of his books. He shows exactly how the left uses statistics to "prove" that which is absolutely false. They are past masters of it, but more and more people are waking up to the fact that there are "lies, d a m n lies, and then there are statistics". Sowell's books are an excellent exposè on this kind of deception. He lays it bare for all to see.
It is now obvious you know less about national security than you do politics...... Actually our national security depends first and foremost on our ability to do accurate threat assessments, and just as important our ability to neutralize real threats and deter aggressive action. Our allies only cooperate when it is in their interest. Duh.
You really believed that story? Learn about it here:
Notice that with the fall of Mosul, ISIS lost its last city in Iraq. The Russians weren't doing as well in Syria, but notice that in the north, Kurdish militias were also taking territory from ISIS. And even then, the Syrian/Russian coalition only lost one city last year.
And at the same time, the United States started identifying and removing sources of revenue for ISIS.
Give Trump credit, though. He continued bombing ISIS fighters. He continued to support the Iraqi army and our Kurdish allies. He even continued to work on isolating and shutting down sources of revenue for ISIS. So he continued most of Obama's policies.
He apparently hasn't continued Obama's policy of doing special forces raids to take out ISIS leaders. In his defense, there weren't that many left, and the surviving ones have been extremely careful to hide their locations.
Those are his policies. And they worked.
Let's take a look at Obama's record...
Yep. Sure looks like it.
Yep.
But we're talking about how Trump's weak presidency has harmed U.S. influence in the world.
This month, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel declared that “the most important changes affecting our Western world and, indeed, the world as a whole” stem from “the United States’ current withdrawal under Trump from its role as a reliable guarantor of Western-influenced multilateralism.” That shift, he noted, “is accelerating the transformation of the global order . . . and the risk of trade wars, arms races and armed conflicts is increasing.”
For Europe, Gabriel argued, the situation is almost existential. Since the end of World War II, he said, “Europe had been an American project in the United States’ clearly understood interests. However, the current U.S. administration now perceives Europe in a very distanced way, regarding previous partners as competitors and sometimes even as at the very least economic opponents.” He urged Europe to take its fate into its own hands and decouple itself from U.S. foreign policy.
Consider also the speech in June by Canada’s foreign minister, Chrystia Freeland, in which she thanked the United States for its seven-decade-long stewardship of the international system and strongly implied that, under the Trump administration, American leadership of that system had reached its end.
Meanwhile, Chinese President Xi Jinping gave a speech to the 19th Communist Party Congress in October that reflected his recognition of these new realities. “China’s international standing has risen as never before,” he noted, and the nation is “blazing a new trail for other developing countries to achieve modernization.” Xi announced “a new era . . . that sees China moving closer to center stage and making greater contributions to mankind.” In previous speeches, he suggested boldly that China would become the new guarantor of the global trading order.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...0a2203f6c8d_story.html?utm_term=.aadd3a6b5d16
For the United States to be a global leader, we have to have a very tight relationship with Europe. And we've held that relationship since 1949 when we established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. NATO is the bond. It's a security bond. Wesley Clark
https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/nato
Today on the NATO line, our military forces face east to prevent a possible invasion. On the other side of the line, the Soviet forces also face east to prevent their people from leaving. Ronald Reagan
https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/nato
And for a couple of dissenting opinions:
NATO's brutal military alliance has become the most perfidious instrument of repression known in the history of humankind. Fidel Castro
https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/nato
Trump didn’t know ‘much’ about NATO when he called it ‘obsolete’: report
http://thehill.com/policy/internati...-about-nato-when-he-called-it-obsolete-report
You know what Lenin said about "useful idiots."
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Do you think this outfit is representative of the majority opinion of the people of the UK?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britain_First
Trump saw fit in one of his tweet fests to link to this nutball group, one that amassed less votes in one 'campaign' than the bloody Monster Raving Loony Party.
Now apply that to the rest of Europe and see how much 'support' Trump is getting. There's always gonna be far right groups and those that are against any sort of multiculturalism in society, that's hardly news but if you think it's truly reflective of a nation on the whole then you're deluded.
jsanford108
New member
What I enjoy about Barbarian is that his signature says he suffers from "Fact Check Syndrome."
The irony is that he has apparently been cured, as nearly all of his political stances and claims are absent of any fact.
Patrick Jane linked a few excellent, factual articles you would do well to read. Post #17, I believe.
And if you wish to dismiss this analogy, then how about a factual source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/18/AR2007111800655.html
Obama taking credit that isn't due him, in the slightest.
Seems that ISIS flourished under Obama. But then again, that is just factual evidence talking. In fact, ISIS as we know it really began in 2010, under a fruitcake named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. (I know you can argue that ISIS was started as a splinter from Al-Q in 1999, but it quickly dwindled, before gaining resurgence in 2010). It emerged with the new name of "ISIS" in 2013.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/index.html
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...administration-admits-cash-iran-deal-will-go/ (I threw in a little politifact for you, since leftists love their biased source)
In fact, your claim of
Yes, they seem to have "abandoned" their nuclear program, don't they? (rhetorical, because they clearly never did)
Too bad that "fact check syndrome" you suffer from has been cured, Barbarian. Otherwise, you might end up a rational person who views reality as it exists, rather than the alternate version preferred by the left. You may have even become a conservative. Oooooh. Chilling thoughts.
The irony is that he has apparently been cured, as nearly all of his political stances and claims are absent of any fact.
This is what humors me, yet saddens me about leftists. You love to cry out "Where/what are your sources?!" Yet, your own sources are polls (usually not Pew Poll). And, rather than citing sources, you just claim that your source exists, yet without direct reference. So hypocritical.
Patrick Jane linked a few excellent, factual articles you would do well to read. Post #17, I believe.
You have no idea how the armed forces are structured, do you? Imagine it like a warehouse business. The manager tells an employee to move a pallet. The manager made that decision and ordered the action. But, the CEO gets credit for it because he is the official in charge of the business.
And if you wish to dismiss this analogy, then how about a factual source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/18/AR2007111800655.html
Obama taking credit that isn't due him, in the slightest.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/26/us-troop-withdrawal-let-islamic-state-enter-iraq-m/
Seems that ISIS flourished under Obama. But then again, that is just factual evidence talking. In fact, ISIS as we know it really began in 2010, under a fruitcake named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. (I know you can argue that ISIS was started as a splinter from Al-Q in 1999, but it quickly dwindled, before gaining resurgence in 2010). It emerged with the new name of "ISIS" in 2013.
Right. Obama really wanted to emphasize this right after the Orlando terrorist killed those in the homosexual club. Obama stressed even more that gun laws need to be enacted, and followed it up with a good bit on how radical Islam is not the problem. (I know I paraphrase, but you get the idea)
Is that what Obama did? It seems he ended up funding terrorism, according to John Kerry.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/index.html
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...administration-admits-cash-iran-deal-will-go/ (I threw in a little politifact for you, since leftists love their biased source)
Was this before or after Obama paid them?
In fact, your claim of
seems to disagree with evidence....again. http://www.nti.org/learn/countries/iran/nuclear/
Yes, they seem to have "abandoned" their nuclear program, don't they? (rhetorical, because they clearly never did)
Too bad that "fact check syndrome" you suffer from has been cured, Barbarian. Otherwise, you might end up a rational person who views reality as it exists, rather than the alternate version preferred by the left. You may have even become a conservative. Oooooh. Chilling thoughts.
I just showed you facts.
So when a scientist collects data on what people think, he uses a ... (can you guess?)
Barbarian notes that Obama ordered that bin Laden be found, and when he was found, ordered that he be captured or killed. And he was.
I was, as an NCO, expected to know. And yes, I did. But here's how I know you don't have any idea:
It not.
In this case, Obama gave the orders. The military responded "yes sir, right away sir." And they found him and took him out as ordered. George W. Bush could have done the same thing. He just didn't care.
Obama cared, and so bin Laden was taken out.
Other than giving the order. BTW, when he made the announcement, he gave full credit to the troops and intelligence people who carried out his order.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNYmK19-d0U
But this isn't about the facts for you, is it?
(blames Obama for the treaty Bush signed committing us to leave Iraq too early)
As you should have known, Obama tried to renegotiate to stay longer, but Iraq would not agree.
It died under Obama. His coalition drove them from Iraq, and then began to remove them from Syria, using Kurdish militia.
When the Obama-led coalition imposed sanctions on Iran, they made it clear that Iran would not get its funds released until they complied with Obama's demand that they end their weapons program. Once they did, they got the money. Not ours. Theirs. We just wouldn't let them have it until they complied with Obama's demands.
So far, the inspectors have found it to be so. They poured concreted into the reactor that was being used for weapons research.
But this isn't about facts for you, is it?
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
The USA was never less respected in the world than it was when Obama drew his red line and then did nothing!
Besides that, how can anyone continue having faith in polls since they were so wrong about the last Presential election?
Besides that, how can anyone continue having faith in polls since they were so wrong about the last Presential election?
U.S influence in the world drops to new low
The Trump Administration's own Secretary of State referred to the President as a "MORON" and then refused to make a outright denial - that speaks volumes!
The fact that Rex Tillerson wasn't replaced immediately provides a clear indication that the nation's "brightest and the best" refuse to work for a Trump White House!
A major reason why America's allies hold this President in such low esteem is because he has no coherent foreign policy - that theme was reinforced by Mitch McConnell who stated yesterday that he wasn't going to introduce legislation to stop the "shutdown" because without knowing where the President stood on the matter, the Senate would only be spinning its wheels!
[h=1]Stories the MSM ignored this week. You need to hear them.[/h]
3 minutes
https://youtu.be/7nSzQugqFwQ
3 minutes
https://youtu.be/7nSzQugqFwQ
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
The same polls said that Trump had no chance!
Why do you not address the fact that Obama drew a red line and then did nothing?
Right, no pictures, buried at sea. Our hero Obama.
PressTV-'Bin Laden died in Afghanistan in 2001'
An American scholar says the whole Osama bin Laden issue was an “elaborate charade,” adding that the al-Qaeda leader died in December 2001 in Afghanistan, not in May 2011 in Pakistan.James Henry Fetzer, who is also a journalist with Veterans Truth Network and a retired professor in Madison, Wisconsin, told Press TV on Wednesday that American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh is only telling a half-truth about the Bin Laden's death. In the article published on the London Review of Books on Sunday, Hersh wrote that high-level lying “remains the modus operandi of US policy, along with secret prisons, drone attacks, Special Forces night raids, bypassing the chain of command, and cutting out those who might say no.”The report claims that Pakistani military officers helped US helicopters enter the country and that a Pakistani security official led the American troops directly to Bin Laden without any resistance from guards.
Bin Laden's Obituary Notice - PaulCraigRoberts.org
Another froot loop that you find more credible than the American troops who raided the compound and killed him.
Secret budget documents show that a US military laboratory in Afghanistan analysed DNA from Osama bin Laden's corpse and confirmed his identify shortly after he was killed by a Navy commando team.
The Pentagon denied more than a year ago it had any records of these tests in a response to a freedom of information request filed by the Associated Press a day after President Barack Obama announced bin Laden's death.
The Washington Post reported on Thursday that classified intelligence budget files provided by National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden stated that a forensic intelligence laboratory run by the Defense Intelligence Agency performed the DNA testing. The Post reported that the tests "provided a conclusive match".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/30/us-analysed-bin-laden-dna
How they found him:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-map-of-where-osama-bin-laden-was-killed.html
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Please tell me how many pollsters predicted that Trump would win all the states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio.
Why didn't you mention the Iran deal? I bet you are proud as punch about that!
Why didn't you mention the fact that during his tenure the USA sold 20% of the American uranium reserves to Russia?
I bet you are proud of that too!
You forgot to mention the fact that team Obama was responsible for sending guns to Mexico which resulted in the death of many Mexicans!
I bet you are proud of that too!
Good point. Obama organized a coalition of nations,seized Iranian assets worldwide, imposed crippling sanctions on Iran, and demanded that they end their nuclear weapons program. Ultimately, the Iranians complied with his demands, and ended their nuclear weapons program.
Could they at some time in the future resume? Sure. But the sanctions would come back on. They need the money more than they need nuclear weapons.
Sometimes persuasion is enhanced by a little coercion.
As you know, that didn't happen.
Uranium One’s two licensed mining operations in Wyoming amounted to about “20 percent of the currently licensed uranium in-situ recovery production capacity in the U.S.,” according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/f.../www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/
It's about 20% of the currently active production. It's laughable to imagine it was 20% of our reserves. And of course, it wasn't sold to Russia. It was sold to a company based in Russia, but the uranium isn't going to Russia.
And of course, Clinton couldn't have stopped the sale, even if she didn't approve it. (which she didn't; someone lower down the chain did).
But this isn't about the facts for you, is it?
The newly released email messages and briefing papers suggest there may be similarities between the Obama operation "Fast and Furious" and an earlier effort during the Bush administration to target the flow of guns into Mexico. The papers include several communications between ATF supervisors and Justice Department prosecutors in Arizona who were trying to build a case against "a very powerful, aggressive and violent" Mexican drug cartel in an earlier operation dubbed "Wide Receiver."
A senior Obama administration Justice Department official who briefed reporters on the documents said the papers show law enforcement officers in the Bush years could have filed criminal conspiracy and false statements charges against lower level figures in the gun trafficking operation, but they decided to watch and wait until they could move higher up the chain of command.
"We want the... manufacturing and distribution pieces also – we want it all," an ATF official wrote in March 2006.
The case ultimately languished in the U.S. Attorney's office in Arizona until the Obama administration sent help from Washington D.C. and indictments were handed down in May and October 2010. Six people have been convicted in connection with Wide Receiver, the senior Justice Department official said.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-administration-used-fast-and-furious-tactics
So this was old stuff for the ATF. However, given the many botched operations during the Bush administration, Obama should have ordered an audit of all plans to be sure that we weren't repeating those mistakes. That's on him.
However, there is this...
On the one hand, it is encouraging to see that the Kremlin acted in a manner inconsistent with having blackmail material on Trump. The suspicion that Russia has such “kompromat” has animated the collusion narrative. Of course, the possibility cannot be discounted — if a porn star could shake down our randy grandee for $130K in hush money, how can we be sure Russia’s got nothing on him? From what we can glean so far, though, it looks like Russia was trying to push its way into Trump’s good graces, not extort him. On the other hand, Russia’s courtship of the NRA, and its apparent leveraging of that relationship to seek inroads to Trump, is disturbing. There is also a new collusion theory: one based on campaign-finance law and therefore very different from the notion of an espionage conspiracy that has guided the investigation up until now...
here is at present no evidence that Russia made multi-million-dollar infusions into the NRA, much less that any political campaign knowingly accepted a ruble. Let’s move to what we do know. Alexander Torshin is a Putin intimate and suspected Russian mafia don. He narrowly escaped arrest in Spain in 2013, in connection with money-laundering on behalf of a Russian organized-crime group called Taganskaya. Torshin was planning to attend a birthday party for a conspirator, Alexander Romanov, but he skipped the party upon being tipped off by a Russian prosecutor that he was about to be arrested. Romanov ultimately pled guilty in the Spanish case, and prosecutors have tape recordings of conversations in which he addresses Torshin as “godfather” — in the notorious mafia sense of that term. (You’ll be shocked to learn that Torshin denies any wrongdoing.) In Putin’s regime, this sort of thing is more a credential than a scandal, so Torshin is a senator in the Federal Assembly of Russia and, more important for our purposes, the deputy governor of the Kremlin’s central bank. He also started a pro-gun group in Moscow called Right to Bear Arms. The cute name is not the only humorous touch here: The last thing Putin wants is a Second Amendment. (Indeed, the fear of Putin types is the reason the Framers gave us ours.) Yet, Right to Bear Arms has proved an excellent vehicle for enticing the NRA into cozy relations. Over the years, Torshin’s group has hosted gun-rights advocates with ties to the NRA, the GOP, and Trump; reciprocally, Torshin has been a guest at NRA conventions since at least 2013...
Torshin did attend the NRA convention. Donald Trump Jr. was also there, and the two apparently met for a few minutes. At this point, there is no reason to believe this was anything more than a quick introduction and some chit-chat about guns. The Mueller investigation is understandably interested in the meeting. It occurred only a few weeks before Don Jr. orchestrated the infamous Trump Tower meeting at which top Trump-campaign officials (Don Jr., Kushner, and Paul Manafort) hoped to get damaging information about Hillary Clinton from Kremlin-connected lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya...
This is a staggering amount of money. There’s nothing illegal about spending big bucks, but in light of the dramatic spending increase in 2016 over 2012, investigators are curious about where the money came from. As Ms. Goldberg points out, tax-exempt organizations like the NRA are not required to divulge their donors. So, questions arise: (a) Did Russia, using Torshin’s sway over its central bank, circumvent the prohibition against foreign donations to U.S. election campaigns by injecting funds into the NRA — with the understanding that most of the money would go to the Trump effort? And (b) did Russia exploit a vehicle, such as Bridges LLC, as its cutout — i.e., did it use a nondescript business entity to donate to the NRA, in order to camouflage the real source of the funds? These are fair questions. They should also be easy questions for the NRA to answer.
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...lexander-torshin-maria-butina-organized-crime
The National Review article is quite right. These questions should be easy for the NRA to answer; if they do, that's the end of it. If they don't answer clearly and completely, then you know there's more to it.
More to the point, Mueller will know. And he'll find it.
Last edited:
The only reason Trump is in the White House is that, for bureaucratic reasons that have never been adequately explained, the Electoral College effectively ignored a Democratic majority of 3 million ballots in the popular vote!
We all know that if that situation had been reversed, "The Donald" and his motley crew of "deplorables" would have declared that the election had been "rigged" by the "deep state," refused to accept the outcome and, in a fit of spite, thrown the nation into a constitutional crisis!
In a "dangerous world," insulting and alienating one's traditional military allies is a strange strategy for a President - who has often stated that his Number 1 priority is the safety of the American people!
Last edited:
Really? How about all the nations that are doing exactly the same thing Trump wants to do here? You know, close the borders. How about the poll that shows 55% of Europeans that want mass immigration stopped now? It was a poll that interviewed 10,000 people across 10 nations of Europe. That's a pretty good cross section of Europe when the the left often relies on polls that interview maybe 1000-1500 out of 330 million people here in the US.
As to if I really care if Europeans agree with what Trump is doing, I don't. The EU and Britain have gone wacko in my opinion. How wacko? Commuters panicked and forced open the doors of a moving rush hour London train because someone was reading aloud from the Bible. The entire line had to shut down because of them. That is your sober and reserved English population for you. Losing their minds so badly they lost complete control of themselves and put themselves in great danger just because someone read scripture to them. I call them loons.
The link is to the Oregonian newspaper, the largest paper in Oregon which is sold all over the state. It flourishes in a state which is left wing dominated politically. So don't go claiming this is some far right wing conspiracy lying about what happened.
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2017/10/panicked_london_train_commuter.html
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Well, I notice you didn't answer my initial question so I'll answer it for you. 'Britain First' is in no way representative of Britain. It's a nutball, asinine hate group that your cabbage brained prat of a president decided to tweet about in one of his myriad twitter fests. Cite your links.
Well of course you don't care. If you did you wouldn't be so dumb/dishonest as to point to one incident in Britain to blanket an entire nation of people. I've no intention of denying the incident happened or to disparage the actions of some when faced with an unknown quantity on a crowded tube train. The guy did not "read scripture" to them. He was a doomsday nut ranting on about homosexuality, sex outside of marriage, repenting and death not being the end and he was scaring people. You wanna preach you don't do it on a claustrophobic train where terrorism is a real threat cos it ain't just the dreaded "Muzzies" who carry out attacks.
The ironic thing is you'd probably say the fleeing passengers did the sensible thing if the guy was quoting verses from the Quran, right?
lain:Well, I notice you didn't answer my initial question so I'll answer it for you. 'Britain First' is in no way representative of Britain. It's a nutball, asinine hate group that your cabbage brained prat of a president decided to tweet about in one of his myriad twitter fests. Cite your links.
Well of course you don't care. If you did you wouldn't be so dumb/dishonest as to point to one incident in Britain to blanket an entire nation of people. I've no intention of denying the incident happened or to disparage the actions of some when faced with an unknown quantity on a crowded tube train. The guy did not "read scripture" to them. He was a doomsday nut ranting on about homosexuality, sex outside of marriage, repenting and death not being the end and he was scaring people. You wanna preach you don't do it on a claustrophobic train where terrorism is a real threat cos it ain't just the dreaded "Muzzies" who carry out attacks.
The ironic thing is you'd probably say the fleeing passengers did the sensible thing if the guy was quoting verses from the Quran, right?
So you want a citation. Well, I'll give you several of them all pointing to the same poll. Oh, and I guess the Royal Institute of International Affairs is a bunch of far right loons to you.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eans-want-end-migration-Muslim-countries.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/08/eur...mmigration-revealed-in-widespread-survey.html
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/8/majority-europeans-want-muslim-immigration-stopped/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/28136...nts-coming-from-muslim-countries-study-finds/
I guess all above sources are far right nut cases in your mind. They must be cabbage headed idiots. And to think that you imply that 55% of Europeans are asinine nutball haters. I'd say you think far worse of your fellow Europeans than I do.
I have to laugh at your determination that I am physically afraid of the Koran being read. One what basis do you determine that? If some unarmed Muslim was reading the Koran in public I'd be far more likely to go talk to him than run from him. In fact, the chances of me running from him and panicking are absolutely zero. I have had discussions about the Koran and the Bible with Muslims. They were interesting, and I enjoyed them. I don't see a Muslim reading from the book he believes is inspired a terrorizing event. Not at all.
So what the Bible actually says scares a cross section of the English population and to you only a "doomsday nut" would believe sit and say these things in public. How are you any different than all those panicked people running from a lone unarmed man who when asked to stop reading did so.
As to what I bolded out of your post, well, I find it hard to imagine that a random passenger carload of people on a random train during rush hour is not representative of the English population. There is a very wide cross section of the population on any public transporation. To say it doesn't represent a cross section of the population in a nation and city that uses rail as a major form of transportation is kind of odd. Or, are you asserting that only the mentally unstable, the fearful, those ignorant of all things Christian, etc... are the vast majority of the English population that use the rail system for transportation? It seems like it's either that or of the 850,000+ people that ride the train in London this one lone car that was full of idiots who just happened to get on the same car at the same time. I'd say that statiscally any random carload of passengers contains a pretty representative cross section of the British population.