Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49

Thread: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

  1. #21

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Im not a fan of Trump nor do i think he is a good president.
    But he is just an average 90s Democrat/Republican, with the added factors of him not being a Political professional, and as the Americans say, "he runs his mouth". I dont think he is dangerous as most people claim, or that he has done incredible damage as the President. Nor more or less then the ones that come before that is for certain. Perhaps have done fewer damage then previous presidents. ( didn't started a war so far). Even Obama was more destructive when you look at it.


    In a recent poll in late July 9 out 10 Republicans deny Trump is racist.Obviously, what would they say?
    Let's keep in mind that Trump's support is strongly linked to how Republicans- and even how a significant percentage of white non-Republicans felt about immigrants, blacks, Muslims, and how much discrimination they believe that whites themselves faced -see previous post. The thing is, as the Quinnipiac poll has shown, white voters are divided. These racists (yes,racists) like to reassure themselves that they are not racists by defining racism in a very narrow and simplistic way: "Trump doesn't say anything about the colour of somebody's skin; ergo he is not racist".
    Remember that a big chunk of the electorate that voted for Obama also voted for Trump. The people you are talking about they always have been there. They are not now more significant then they once was.

    I point out as the main culprit towards fatigue of mainstream politicians, and politics, on why the average joe chose to vote for trump despite him being a mouth runner.


    Same thing happening in Europe and other places in various forms. Perhaps there is a big part of our societies that views things like Immigration with caution, and probably always have been that way. And people now are increasingly sick and tired, and it is on several countries all at once, it cant be a coincidence. The general view on this things has also shifted, and things have become more polarized, ( not just in US), and i blame the effects of modern Social media.
    And this aren't the neo nazis or the far right, we are talking about, we are talking about core electorates. Because are those that make a difference.
    Last edited by Knight of Heaven; September 13, 2019 at 10:36 AM.

  2. #22

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Anyone can take issue with research questions in any piece of research. Itís fairly easy to do as it doesnít require a counter argument, merely broad complaints about methodology. Iím not interested in debating the type of wood in each tree as a means of casting doubt on the existence of the forest.
    The methodology comes out of field that's mostly cargo cult science as far as I can tell, and it's unlikely to get any better for reasons I discussed here. Part of the problem though, is the inapplicability of the scientific method to the subject they want to study. Value judgments are by nature empirically unverifiable, so it is necessary for researchers to begin with an assumption regarding what constitutes racism. If one begins with an assumption that is effectively along the lines of "Republican conservatism is racist" as Ludicus asserted, one can certainly find correlative data to argue racism predicts support for Trump, as it's no secret that Republican conservatives are more likely to support Trump. In any case, this is a tangent that probably doesn't add much interesting to the thread. I'll just say that I'm skeptical that the daily torrent of anecdotes are representative of the bulk of Trump's support, and leave it at that.

    A more interesting question for me, is what percentage of likely Trump voters are really Trump supporters vs those who simply prefer him over a Democrat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Perhaps the reason Trump supporters donít consider his ostensibly racist sentiments racist is because they fairly unanimously agree with these sentiments.
    Yeah, probably.

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Trump hates Obama's guts not because of Obama's ancestry, but because Obama more or less started a vendetta with Trump that has escalated to a psychosis that approaches Trump's obsession with Hilary who is white.
    Trump is racist with the Mexicans I think, not with blacks. If one of his sons shows up with a very pretty daughter of a black billionaire, Trump would congratulate him and be proud. If one of his sons shows up with the snow-white daughter of a grocer that is low-middle class, Trump would feel personally insulted.
    He doesn't consider blacks to be inherently inferior people. He considers poor or ugly people to be inferior people despite of color.
    I actually doubt Trump has any strong feelings one way or the other about Obama, Hillary, or Mexicans. I think it's all politics. He just spams stream of consciousness publicly until he finds something that clicks, either because it fires up supporters or enrages opponents or both, then he repeats and doubles down. In his speeches you can see him trying out ideas to see if they catch, if there's not much of a reaction he just moves on to the next topic. If there's an uproar, he elaborates. His rallies are like trying out a marketing pitch in front of a consumer focus group.

    The reason I doubt there's any emotion behind it is you can see how he quickly changes gears. When someone is a problem for him, they're every kind of terrible, as soon as that is no longer useful for him because the person has either given him enough to claim victory or has actually become a subordinate, then he has plenty of nice things to say about them if it suits his purposes. It's the same pattern with everyone from Chris Christie and Ben Carson to Kim Jong-un. Sometimes he seems authentically irritated when he's taken off guard, but during his rallies or during the debates he doesn't come across as emotionally invested in anything other than the game.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  3. #23
    Legio_Italica's Avatar Lost in Limbo
    Civitate Praefect

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,673

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    The methodology comes out of field that's mostly cargo cult scienceas far as I can tell, and it's unlikely to get any better for reasons I discussed here. Part of the problem though, is the inapplicability of the scientific method to the subject they want to study.
    There’s certainly such a thing as confirmation bias, but it’s another matter entirely to infer that anything which can’t be tested and replicated 10 times in a petri dish doesn’t follow the strict definitions and steps of the scientific method, and therefore “doesn’t count” as science. If you want to cast aspersions on the very concept of social science, I’ll have to leave you to it.


    As for your comments on climate science, I can only refer you to the tree and forest analogy mentioned previously. In the case of climate science especially, stonewalling climate action on the basis that current scientific consensus could be theoretically overturned by some future discovery is ridiculous given that the cost of being fundamentally wrong is.....? Electric cars? Cleaner air? Sea walls? I digress.
    Value judgments are by nature empirically unverifiable, so it is necessary for researchers to begin with an assumption regarding what constitutes racism. If one begins with an assumption that is effectively along the lines of "Republican conservatism is racist" as Ludicus asserted, one can certainly find correlative data to argue racism predicts support for Trump, as it's no secret that Republican conservatives are more likely to support Trump.
    That’s not what’s happening with studies like the ones I linked to, and value judgements are assessed and verified all the time. One has to use proxy questions to isolate and identify the trend(s) being studied before any statistically significant patterns can be established. The number of people who will respond affirmatively to the question “Do you support Trump because you’re racist” is near zero. So instead, you ask other questions to figure out, for example, what is motivating people to support Trump.

    Rejecting the existence of white privilege and downplaying the significance of racism are not inherently racist beliefs. If the sample feels so strongly about those beliefs that it motivates them to vote/politically support a certain way when controlling for a host of other “what about this” factors, it’s clear racial angst is the driving factor behind their support....unless you want to reverse the causation and claim that supporting Trump is what’s causing the racial angst after the fact. This phenomenon has been replicated in study after study with variations on the line of questioning. Given the salience of the correlation, more study is likely to more explicitly confirm, not disprove, the initial observations.
    In any case, this is a tangent that probably doesn't add much interesting to the thread.
    The OP specifically rejected the link between white racial resentment and Trump support, and that belief seemed to inform his assessment of Trump’s behavior. It’s certainly relevant.
    I'll just say that I'm skeptical that the daily torrent of anecdotes are representative of the bulk of Trump's support, and leave it at that.
    And I’ll just say I’m beyond skeptical some future discovery will fundamentally countervail the ocean of evidence that says they are.
    A more interesting question for me, is what percentage of likely Trump voters are really Trump supporters vs those who simply prefer him over a Democrat.
    Given Trump’s remarkably consistent low approval ratings and sky high support among Republicans, I think we know the answer to that. Moreover, the answer is affirmed every time Republicans overwhelmingly side with Trump over any other Republican, let alone a Democrat. Just this week the state PR team at Fox informed us John Bolton is apparently a flaming libtard simply because Trump fired him and trashed him on Twitter. John. Bolton.


    As a lifelong Republican who still considers myself a conservative, but registered as a Democrat in 2016, I know how I would answer that question. Country over party. Every time. All the time.
    Last edited by Legio_Italica; September 13, 2019 at 02:12 PM.

  4. #24
    Ludicus's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    10,720

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    While most Racists are Trump supporters, that doesn't mean that most Trump supporters are racists.
    I would say,not all of them...not all of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Trump is racist with the Mexicans I think, not with blacks
    With African Americans as well as Mexicans, Hispanics more broadly, Native Americans, Muslims, Jews (yes, Jews*) immigrants, women, and people with disabilities. Trump is not a selective racist. Trump is a white supremacist.
    *I quote: "And I think any Jewish people that vote for a Democrat, I think it shows either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty" Trump's tweets about 'disloyal' Jews are laced with centuries of antisemitism

    Trump's extreme bias and discriminatory rhetoric against Muslims/Islam makes a significant part of his "Make America Great Again" slogan. For those of you with "poor" memory, the racist said: "Islam hates us". And for the record,let's keep in mind Donald Trump's Muslim Database Game | The New Yorker
    ...Trump's defense has not, so far, involved thoroughly disavowing a national registry of Muslims.
    An enlightening article, Trump's Racism: An Oral History - The Atlantic

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    ...but because Obama more or less started a vendetta with Trump
    That's chronologically impossible,Trump started questioning Obama’s birthplace in March of 2011; Obama mocked Trump in May 2015, at White House Correspondent Dinner.
    Read the full paper, Journal of Hate Studies : Donald Trump and the Birther Conspiracy. - Bates College
    A few excerpts,
    (...)The birther conspiracy first emerged following Barack Obama’s infamous 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention, when Andy Martin, a fringe political candidate, alleged “Obama is a Muslim who has concealed his religion” (Parlett, 2014, p. 4).
    ... During the 2008 campaign, as social media amplified the birther conspiracy, Obama was compelled to release a birth certificate to quash the growing rumors
    ... Still the lies persisted. By summer of 2009, a Pew survey found that 81% respondents nationwide had heard at least something about “some people who claim that Barack Obama was not born in the US and therefore not eligible to be president” (Bowman & Rugg, 2013, p. 35).
    The resilience of birtherism, in many ways, is the result of its embrace by Donald Trump who was the first birther with “the ability to get the theory into the mainstream” (Stelter, 2011, para. 10). Beginning in the spring of 2011 as he contemplated challenging Obama, Trump used the birther issue to gain the attention of the media and mobilize white voters...
    --
    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    I actually doubt Trump has any strong feelings one way or the other about Obama..or Mexicans. I think it's all politics
    It's all about the politics of racism.
    Last edited by Ludicus; September 13, 2019 at 03:15 PM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une ‚me perverse. Cíest d'avoir une ‚me habituťe
    Charles Pťguy

  5. #25

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    As for your comments on climate science, I can only refer you to the tree and forest analogy mentioned previously. In the case of climate science especially, stonewalling climate action on the basis that current scientific consensus could be theoretically overturned by some future discovery is ridiculous given that the cost of being fundamentally wrong is.....? Electric cars? Cleaner air? Sea walls? I digress.
    The comments I made in that thread about why some people are skeptical of academia were descriptive not prescriptive. Some broader points that I made that are applicable is the fact that viewpoint diversity improves science since without it, academics can't effectively serve the function of being the solution to each other's confirmation bias. Minority opinions, even when they are ultimately wrong, improve the process overall, often accelerating discovery. I believe that any scientific field can only be compromised by its politicization, whether its due to the establishment of unwarranted orthodoxies or political attempts to interfere with research. Assuming the climate change consensus is broadly correct, we now have a situation where serious government action is near impossible because a huge segment of society dismisses the field's conclusions a priori. That's what politicization has gotten us, and calling the skeptics stupid isn't going to make it better. Obviously looking elsewhere in the world, this was not an inevitable outcome.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    There’s certainly such a thing as confirmation bias, but it’s another matter entirely to infer that anything which can’t be tested and replicated 10 times in a petri dish doesn’t follow the strict definitions and steps of the scientific method, and therefore “doesn’t count” as science. If you want to cast aspersions on the very concept of social science, I’ll have to leave you to it.
    My field involves both social science and the hard sciences. There is a great deal of pseudoscience in the social sciences, in some cases this is remediable, in others it's not possible. I'd say the amount of actual science being done in the social sciences varies significantly by field.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    That’s not what’s happening with studies like the ones I linked to, and value judgements are assessed and verified all the time. One has to use proxy questions to isolate and identify the trend(s) being studied before any statistically significant patterns can be established. The number of people who will respond affirmatively to the question “Do you support Trump because you’re racist” is near zero. So instead, you ask other questions to figure out, for example, what is motivating people to vote for Trump.
    This is not possible. One cannot design an experiment which falsifies the proposition X belief is racist. If two people disagree on what is or isn't racist, there is no scientific way to resolve the issue. Furthermore, there is currently no way to empirically verify whether a person holds a particular belief, much less whether the answer to X proxy question correlates with a particular belief. The results of the studies you posted are simply rearrangements of the assumptions put into them. They may be arranged according to a real data set, but reading them one learns nothing but how the authors assumptions correlate with a particular data set. The flaw comes in believing that the data itself can say more than it is. All we can know, all that is empirically verifiable, is what people said. Now if we can agree on a definition, a shared assumption, then we can produce something that looks quite a bit like science, and may actually be a useful thought experiment, but it isn't science. From it one could make a logical argument, but not a scientific argument. One could argue that we do this all the time in science, come up with definitions from which to proceed, like "species" for example. It's a concept rather than something objectively real, but it works, because it's a concept that maps closely to something that is objectively real. The same doesn't work for concepts which are empirically unverifiable. We may feel we know what "good" is or what "racism" is, we may believe they are objectively real, but they are immune to empirical inquiry. The studies you posted claim to demonstrate something they can't, they don't even bother to attempt to justify their basic assumptions. What I'm saying may seem kind of out there, or like radical skepticism, but I'd argue that reaction is due to the sheer amount of pseudoscience still widely accepted as science. All sorts of interesting data analysis can be done with what people say, which isn't pseudoscience, as long as it's not presented as answering questions it can't. We may even agree on what is reasonable to infer from a particular arrangement of correlations, but the difference between science and logic is science can prove which one of us is wrong regardless of whether or not we agree upon a set of basic assumptions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Just this week the state PR team at Fox informed us John Bolton is apparently a flaming libtard simply because Trump fired him and trashed him on Twitter. John. Bolton.
    That's funny.
    Last edited by sumskilz; September 13, 2019 at 04:56 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  6. #26
    Legio_Italica's Avatar Lost in Limbo
    Civitate Praefect

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,673

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    @sumskilz:

    I would agree that realistic climate action is geared toward aggressive adaptation more than symbolic prevention at this point. However, people dismissing the whole affair a priori has less to do with polarization, and a great deal more with one side in particular acting in bad faith, feeding peopleís personal political perceptions to exacerbate that polarization in order to protect their own financial interests from political intervention. The divide is also a uniquely American phenomenon for the most part, so thereís clearly something else at work here, other than the inevitability of the existence of minority opinions. The ďproblems on both sidesĒ approach doesnít really apply, given the growing disparity in the rising costs of inaction vs the fairly static costs and methods of action, as I mentioned.


    Your metric for the testability of belief or behavior appears to boil down to the concept that motivations cannot be proven because the ability of the subject to explicitly or implicitly reject the hypothesis nullifies any possible conclusions. That is pretty radical skepticism and calls into question the foundation of institutions like police procedure, the legal system or social academia as a whole. While itís possible or probable you have a perfectly sound rationale for your position, and apply it with equal weight in any given scenario, I donít find it particularly useful.


    These studies didnít set out to scientifically prove anyone is racist, and I donít think the authors overstated their conclusions given they also looked for reasonably possible Z variables that might otherwise explain the observable correlation between X and Y. They set out to identify where motivations correlated with choices. Whether or not this counts as hard or acceptable science according to an arbitrary definition does not negate the relevance of the findings.


    I donít consider the question of the motivations for Trump support a moral one. The damage is done and the crime cannot be reversed. Even so, establishing motive for the crime is a worthwhile endeavor, if only for the sake of truth, justice, the American way, all that good stuff. Itís better to believe there is a reason Trump happened. The alternative is to accept the fatalistic conclusion that the US was always the very same hole country our Constitution was supposed to guard against.

  7. #27

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Trump is really just a classic cult leader, and his supporters cultists. Like all cult leaders he craves godlike power, and his cultists want to give him that power so he can fix their lives for them and protect them from the bad guys. They want to go back to childhood where Trump, as their parent, will take care of every need and fix every problem. But like all cultists they don't realize that their leader sees them at best as highly disposable objects, at worst actively despises them. His entire life he has used others and tossed them aside the moment they stopped being useful. He has no capacity for empathy, is a habitual liar, and possibly a sociopath.

  8. #28
    Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    4,442

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict View Post
    Trump is really just a classic cult leader, and his supporters cultists. Like all cult leaders he craves godlike power, and his cultists want to give him that power so he can fix their lives for them and protect them from the bad guys. They want to go back to childhood where Trump, as their parent, will take care of every need and fix every problem. But like all cultists they don't realize that their leader sees them at best as highly disposable objects, at worst actively despises them. His entire life he has used others and tossed them aside the moment they stopped being useful. He has no capacity for empathy, is a habitual liar, and possibly a sociopath.
    But enough about Obama.


  9. #29

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    But enough about Obama.

    Another classic sign of cult behavior is that cultists are trained to respond to non-cult approved ideas with thought-terminating cliches and slogans. Say for instance a cultist hears something negative about Trump. He immediately tries to deflect to "but Obama" or "but Hillary", just as he has been trained. This keeps the cultist from considering what the other person is saying, or worse yet engaging in independent thought.

    Trump shares the same problem with most cult leaders. Each is continually looking to purge his own doubts about his worth by basking in the adoration of others. But those doubts always nag at him, so he will always demand more and more from those around him. More worship. More sex. More money. You can never sacrifice enough, never give enough, never be good enough. Eventually the leader asks for more than a cultist can give, and when the cultist can't deliver he is cast aside without a second thought (if he's lucky).

  10. #30

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict View Post
    Another classic sign of cult behavior is that cultists are trained to respond to non-cult approved ideas with thought-terminating cliches and slogans. Say for instance a cultist hears something negative about Trump. He immediately tries to deflect to "but Obama" or "but Hillary", just as he has been trained. This keeps the cultist from considering what the other person is saying, or worse yet engaging in independent thought.
    That argument addressed to Prodromos might work better if this weren't the second post in the thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    There's nothing calculated about it; there's no 4D chess here. There's no need to look for some grand strategy behind his moves. He's just a subhuman scumbag. Once you realize that, then everything he does makes perfect sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  11. #31

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict View Post
    Another classic sign of cult behavior is that cultists are trained to respond to non-cult approved ideas with thought-terminating cliches and slogans. Say for instance a cultist hears something negative about Trump. He immediately tries to deflect to "but Obama" or "but Hillary", just as he has been trained. This keeps the cultist from considering what the other person is saying, or worse yet engaging in independent thought.

    Trump shares the same problem with most cult leaders. Each is continually looking to purge his own doubts about his worth by basking in the adoration of others. But those doubts always nag at him, so he will always demand more and more from those around him. More worship. More sex. More money. You can never sacrifice enough, never give enough, never be good enough. Eventually the leader asks for more than a cultist can give, and when the cultist can't deliver he is cast aside without a second thought (if he's lucky).
    I'm quite sure you don't have to be a "cultist" to engage in whataboutery

  12. #32

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    I'm quite sure you don't have to be a "cultist" to engage in whataboutery
    True enough. Not everyone who engages in whataboutery is a cultist, but all cultists do engage in whataboutery.

  13. #33
    Ludicus's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    10,720

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict View Post
    Trump is really just a classic cult leader.
    Don't forget to mention God, working for some but not for others. Last January, religious leaders and Trump's administration celebrated the "power of prayer" at the White House, and the head of a Florida megachurch- a televangelist who preaches that God will reward believers with material wealth - declared the White House "holy ground", and staved off demons.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une ‚me perverse. Cíest d'avoir une ‚me habituťe
    Charles Pťguy

  14. #34
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    21,134

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Speaking of U-turns, the stable genius in his great and unmatched wisdom has given mixed signals. At first he seemed to support Erdogan's intervention against the Kurds (stalwart USA allies in the area but not that useful anymore) and then U-turned to say that if Erdogan goes too far, the Turkish economy will pay the price
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  15. #35
    Legio_Italica's Avatar Lost in Limbo
    Civitate Praefect

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,673

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Speaking of U-turns, the stable genius in his great and unmatched wisdom has given mixed signals. At first he seemed to support Erdogan's intervention against the Kurds (stalwart USA allies in the area but not that useful anymore) and then U-turned to say that if Erdogan goes too far, the Turkish economy will pay the price
    Looks like the mystery has already been solved. I canít say itís anything other than an utterly predictable solution:


    Donald Trump got "rolled" by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a National Security Council source with direct knowledge of the discussions told Newsweek.
    In a scheduled phone call on Sunday afternoon between President Trump and President Erdogan, Trump said he would withdraw U.S. forces from northern Syria. The phone call was scheduled after Turkey announced it was planning to invade Syria, and hours after Erdogan reinforced his army units at the Syrian-Turkish border and issued his strongest threat to launch a military incursion, according to the National Security Council official to whom Newsweekspoke on condition of anonymity.


    The U.S. withdrawal plays into the hands of the Islamic State group, Damascus and Moscow, and the announcement left Trump's own Defense Department "completely stunned," said Pentagon officials. Turkey, like the United States, wants regime change in Syria. Russia and Iran support the Assad regime.


    "President Trump was definitely out-negotiated and only endorsed the troop withdraw to make it look like we are getting somethingóbut we are not getting something," the National Security Council source told Newsweek. "The U.S. national security has entered a state of increased danger for decades to come because the president has no spine and that's the bottom line."
    Newsweek granted the National Security Council official anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. The source said it would not be surprising to see a Turkish incursion in the next 24 to 96 hours.


    https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-o...-spine-1463623


  16. #36
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    21,134

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Yeah, that source seems a bit bogus. For starters, it seems like someone that comments on what is already known, not insider info. Second, a national security guy that says "The U.S. national security has entered a state of increased danger for decades to come because the president has no spine and that's the bottom line." is doing his country's security a disservice. It's not just American citizens that read those things.
    There's a reason they were not authorized to discuss the subject.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  17. #37
    Legio_Italica's Avatar Lost in Limbo
    Civitate Praefect

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,673

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Yeah, that source seems a bit bogus. For starters, it seems like someone that comments on what is already known, not insider info. Second, a national security guy that says "The U.S. national security has entered a state of increased danger for decades to come because the president has no spine and that's the bottom line." is doing his country's security a disservice. It's not just American citizens that read those things.
    There's a reason they were not authorized to discuss the subject.
    I’m not sure what your objection to the source is. As far as national security goes, nothing was leaked or compromised. As you say, the source merely comments on known information, and confirms that Trump was completely outgunned, forced to pretend pulling out was his idea, and not a reaction to imminent Turkish invasion. It’s also no secret that protecting the Kurds from genocide by Turkey was one of the few areas of foreign policy that had nearly universal support from as far left as Noam Chomsky to as far right as John Bolton.

    The nominal US forces in the region were merely a token to prevent Turkish invasion after the Kurds did the heavy lifting against ISIL. That deterrent is now gone. Everyone is angry, and rightfully so. If the source has any fault at all, it’s being boring. The source is correct to say that Trump has compromised national security. Trump’s actions are yet another self-inflicted wound to US credibility and to our ability to build coalitions and further our interests abroad. This is hardly the first time Trump has been inexplicably deferential to Erdogan, either. I would not be the least bit surprised if Erdogan has some kind of leverage on Trump individually.
    Last edited by Legio_Italica; October 08, 2019 at 07:53 AM.

  18. #38
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    21,134

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Trump wanted out of the Middle East. He promised to move USA towards the isolationist policies of earlier eras, he doesn't want USA to be world policeman. He's doing that. He wants out.
    Do I agree with it? Not really. I am no fun of throwing the Kurds under the bus and the other "world peace pimps" are worse than USA in my opinion. But if the USA citizens didn't like his policies, they shouldn't have voted for him. He was clearly stating that he doesn't want more USA involvement, he wants less.

    I watched Trump's interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUYdkz6c3nw
    As Trump said, he's not siding with anybody. He simply wants out of the festering pit that is the Middle East. Trump is not wrong to say that Kurds and Turks are "natural enemies" and that they've been fighting for centuries.
    I would like USA to stay there and pay the "blood tax" for what is essentially England's and France's century-old mistakes. But I understand that he doesn't want to stay there for ever and that he doesn't really give a crap if some "Near East guys kill a few brown guys that happened to be our allies".
    Do I think that this would lead to a resurgence of Jihadists in the area? Yes, I do. I believe that getting out of there is short-sighted. In fact, I believe it would be better for everyone, including USA, if USA sent more forces in the area to help mop up the Jihadists.

    But the guy the USA voters picked disagrees.
    So he made another legendary U-turn and threw his Kurdish allies under the bus. And then turned the U-turn to a spin to threaten the Turkish economy to get back the votes he lost by throwing the Kurds under the bus.

    As such, I don't see these U-turns as blunders and I also don't see those as 4-D chess. He tried to get away from the Middle East, there was condemnation from everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike and as a true politician he tried to backtrack cause he loves adoration.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 08, 2019 at 10:15 AM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  19. #39
    Legio_Italica's Avatar Lost in Limbo
    Civitate Praefect

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,673

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Trump wanted out of the Middle East. He promised to move USA towards the isolationist policies of earlier eras, he doesn't want USA to be world policeman. He's doing that. He wants out.
    Do I agree with it? Not really. I am no fun of throwing the Kurds under the bus and the other "world peace pimps" are worse than USA in my opinion. But if the USA citizens didn't like his policies, they shouldn't have voted for him. He was clearly stating that he doesn't want more USA involvement, he wants less.
    I’m not sure what this has to do with your objections to the NSC source. To call Trump’s knee-jerk reaction after yet another mysterious phone call with a foreign despot “policy” is counterfactual and does not reflect the meaning of the word policy. I’m at a loss as to why you would try to spin it that way, unprompted. He just sent more US troops to Saudi Arabia, after all.


    By all accounts, he blindsided his own administration, US leadership, and our allies around the world by pulling out of Northern Syria and abandoning the Kurds to annihilation. Trump has no policies, he reacts moment to moment like a child. We all know that by now. His habitual regurgitation of foreign talking points after the fact in a press conference is not exculpatory as you seem to suggest, nor is it an indication of policy. We’ve seen the same troubling phenomenon many times before. This has nothing to do with what people voted for:


    Trump and Erdogan (last year)
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...gan-phone-call


    Trump and Xi Jinping
    https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-...es-claim-stack


    Trump, Putin, et al
    https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trum...-calls-1463352


    Trump and Putin
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/trump-and-putins-phone-call-helsinki-all-over-again/588709/


    Edit: I guess we needn’t look far to determine probable motivations for Trump’s subservience to Erdogan:
    The conflict of interest and the way it could affect Trump’s position on important issues—or at least the perception of how it could affect his position—quickly became obvious after Trump made this comment. In June 2016, after Trump said he supported a ban on immigration by people from countries he said were associated with Islamic terrorism—he called them “terror countries”—Erdogan objected, and so did Dogan, and both threatened to remove Trump’s name from the buildings.
    That’s no small threat—according to personal financial disclosures filed by Trump, since he launched his bid for the presidency, he has earned somewhere between $3.2 million and $17 million in royalties from the deal. (The amounts are given in ranges; the precise figures are unclear.)
    Less than a month after the threat to remove his name was made, Trump very publicly voiced support for Erdogan when the Turkish leader faced a coup attempt. And his closeness with Erdogan has continued, even over the objections of some of Trump’s most reliable supporters. For instance, in May 2017, when Erdogan visited Washington, D.C., for a White House visit, Turkish agents violently attacked protesters outside the Turkish ambassador’s residence—shoving past local police officers to do so. Video showed Erdogan calmly watching the attack from his car. Although the House of Representatives, then under GOP control, voted 397-0 to condemn the attacks, Trump refused to do so. A few months later, Trump praised Erdogan, describing him as “a very good friend” and saying he gets “very high marks” for the way he runs Turkey.


    https://www.motherjones.com/politics...est-in-turkey/

    Last edited by Legio_Italica; October 08, 2019 at 04:52 PM.

  20. #40
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    21,134

    Default Re: Trump's U-Turns and whether they are U-turns, blunders or simply "changing with the times"

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    He just sent more US troops to Saudi Arabia, after all.

    What
    the
    Feck? (<=== not censor bypass)



    Well, I can't explain everything and I don't know why he sent more people to Saudi Arabia. But he has been against more involvement in Syria for long.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 09, 2019 at 02:54 PM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •