Trump

[nigel99 471]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Yes and no.  I think the world would be a poorer place if we refused to help Britain during World War II.

I agree there will always be situations where it is has a net positive outcome. WW2 is one, I’m not entirely sure about Ukraine.

That said maybe with America’s Hitler in a few years Germany could be allied with the Uk and helping to free Americans from a tyrannical Dictator. 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Yes and no.  I think the world would be a poorer place if we refused to help Britain during World War II.

Somewhat of a stretch to argue it wasn't our business, too. 

[Phil1111 1,149]

Its too easy to blame the US for its somewhat bull in the china shop international military interventions. IMO it mostly arises because politicians can't resist using the most powerful military in the world.

The US leads NATO, its started an alliance to counter China. Led the opposition to the Russian invasion.etc, etc.

[billvon 2,990]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Somewhat of a stretch to argue it wasn't our business, too. 

It wasn't our business until the Japanese attacked.  And had we withheld our aid until that time, Britain would have fallen - and we would have been fighting Nazi-occupied Britain along with the rest of the Axis.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

6 minutes ago, billvon said:

It wasn't our business until the Japanese attacked.  And had we withheld our aid until that time, Britain would have fallen - and we would have been fighting Nazi-occupied Britain along with the rest of the Axis.

I get your point that Pearl Harbor changed the opinion of most Americans about the war in Europe but that wrong opinion doesn't mean it wasn't our business. So yes, if being forced off the sidelines is what made it our business, I agree. 

[tkhayes 348]

4 hours ago, billvon said:

It wasn't our business until the Japanese attacked.  And had we withheld our aid until that time, Britain would have fallen - and we would have been fighting Nazi-occupied Britain along with the rest of the Axis.

arguably it absolutely WAS our business.....   it is plain ignorant for average people to think that horrible things in other parts of the world are not our problem or do not affect us.  The world is a rather small place.  There is isolationism, democracy (the will of the people) and then there are morals ideology and doing the right thing 'because it is the right thing to do'.

ALL problems in the world affect us in some way, and the most horrible things should be actively fought because it is the right thing to do.  The will of the people is not actually always the best thing.... we used to own slaves - that was also the will of the people for hundreds of year.

Edited September 23, 2024 by tkhayes

[Erroll 80]

9 hours ago, obelixtim said:

Rhodesia was prosperous and the entire population was doing ok

Except for the farmers getting murdered, Rhodesian soldiers (as well as SA soldiers) getting killed.....

[jakee 1,489]

9 hours ago, nigel99 said:

Obviously the Rhodesian situation was not right, but it is long and complicated and it’s far from black and white. The point was the West Interfered and installed Mugabe

Do you think the white goverment in a black country got there in the first place without western interference?

And this excert from the Wikipedia history of the Bush War doesn't sound like everything was really goig so well...

The Rhodesians' means to continue the war were also eroding fast. In December 1978, a ZANLA unit penetrated the outskirts of Salisbury and fired a volley of rockets and incendiary device rounds into the main oil storage depot – the most heavily defended economic asset in the country. The storage tanks burned for five days, giving off a column of smoke that could be seen 130 kilometres (80 mi) away. Five hundred thousand barrels (79,000 m3) of petroleum product (comprising Rhodesia's strategic oil reserve) were lost.[116]

The government's defence spending increased from R$30 million, 8.5% of the national budget in 1971 to 1972, to R$400 m in 1978 to 1979, 47% of the national budget. In 1980, the post-independence government of Zimbabwe inherited a US$500 million national debt.[117]

Edited September 23, 2024 by jakee

[nigel99 471]

1 hour ago, jakee said:

Do you think the white goverment in a black country got there in the first place without western interference?

And this excert from the Wikipedia history of the Bush War doesn't sound like everything was really goig so well...

The Rhodesians' means to continue the war were also eroding fast. In December 1978, a ZANLA unit penetrated the outskirts of Salisbury and fired a volley of rockets and incendiary device rounds into the main oil storage depot – the most heavily defended economic asset in the country. The storage tanks burned for five days, giving off a column of smoke that could be seen 130 kilometres (80 mi) away. Five hundred thousand barrels (79,000 m3) of petroleum product (comprising Rhodesia's strategic oil reserve) were lost.[116]

The government's defence spending increased from R$30 million, 8.5% of the national budget in 1971 to 1972, to R$400 m in 1978 to 1979, 47% of the national budget. In 1980, the post-independence government of Zimbabwe inherited a US$500 million national debt.[117]

It’s a complicated history. Don’t forget that there were sanctions in place prior to independence. The bush war was a stuff up ironically caused by the poorly educated whites in the first place (Maga equivalents). But it was western interference that put Mugabe in power instead of Bishop Tutu who actually won the first election and not Mugabe.

It’s a whole conversation on its own and wasn’t meant to derail the Trump conversation. 

[jakee 1,489]

37 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

But it was western interference that put Mugabe in power instead of Bishop Tutu who actually won the first election and not Mugabe.

Wrong Bishop. 

The election was held because the Rhodesian government realised it coudn;t continue to fight the Bush war forever. Bishop Muzorewa won an election Mugabe and other main opposition parties weren't allowed to participate in, therefore his government did not solve any of the problems that had led to it coming into 'power' in the first place. Few in the west wanted Mugaba in power (he identified as a freakin' Marxist, not one of our usual good buddies) but they did lead negotiations for an actual election.

Ironically, the western interference that ultimately lead to Mugabe was really the western interference that imposed white government on the nation in the first place - the one that you say was doing well.

[nigel99 471]

41 minutes ago, jakee said:

Wrong Bishop. 

The election was held because the Rhodesian government realised it coudn;t continue to fight the Bush war forever. Bishop Muzorewa won an election Mugabe and other main opposition parties weren't allowed to participate in, therefore his government did not solve any of the problems that had led to it coming into 'power' in the first place. Few in the west wanted Mugaba in power (he identified as a freakin' Marxist, not one of our usual good buddies) but they did lead negotiations for an actual election.

Ironically, the western interference that ultimately lead to Mugabe was really the western interference that imposed white government on the nation in the first place - the one that you say was doing well.

Yup my mistake on the bishop, it’s been a while and I was 6 at the time. Also by ‘well’ it was a hell of a lot better than under Bob.

Regarding Trump though this is interesting 

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-immigrant-serial-numbers/

[jakee 1,489]

17 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

Also by ‘well’ it was a hell of a lot better than under Bob.

Yes, it was going so well it directly lead to the election of Mugabe. People must have been very happy.

[wmw999 2,444]

Colonialism puts a whole new meaning into "doing well," doesn't it?

Wendy P.

[billvon 2,990]

Truth Social (DJT) down to $12.60 as of today.  It has to be above $13 or so for Trump to make money on it.

[headoverheels 333]

25 minutes ago, billvon said:

 It has to be above $13 or so for Trump to make money on it.

Why is that?

[Phil1111 1,149]

36 minutes ago, billvon said:

Truth Social (DJT) down to $12.60 as of today.  It has to be above $13 or so for Trump to make money on it.

Are you sure because I thought trump didn't invest any cash of his own.

In other news insiders are dumping stock "Trading volume accelerated significantly as the lockup lifted. More than 14 million shares changed hands on Thursday and nearly 22 million were exchanged Friday, far exceeding the 30-day average volume of about 8.3 million shares.

Within the first 90 minutes of trading Monday, traders swapped about seven million shares."

I feel bad for all of trump's fanboys who lost big time. Like $97 peak to $12.54 now I guess it certainly fits with the MAGA narrative that the economy under Biden is terrible.

Edited September 23, 2024 by Phil1111

[kallend 2,026]

On 9/22/2024 at 4:27 PM, billvon said:

Yes and no.  I think the world would be a poorer place if we refused to help Britain during World War II.

Hitler did declare war on the USA.  Kinda hard to ignore that.

[nigel99 471]

17 hours ago, billvon said:

Truth Social (DJT) down to $12.60 as of today.  It has to be above $13 or so for Trump to make money on it.

If it implodes prior to Nov 5th do you think it will have any political effect? It would be quite nice if the dems were already pounding him on the stock market performance over the past 12 months and DJT performance. 

[Phil1111 1,149]

The crypto industry is spending $120 million on this US election. They have already bought trump. Trump's offspring, led by Barron have their own crypto. Yesterday trump himself initiated a $100 coin-"medallion" containing one ounce of silver. Silver is currently worth $30 an ounce.

Should the greenback be shorted?

[jakee 1,489]

18 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Are you sure because I thought trump didn't invest any cash of his own.

I saw one story that said he wouldn’t be allowed to sell if it dropped below $12 by end of last week, which I don’t think happened? There may be more time/price restrictions after that. I’m pretty sure his shares are still theoretically worth ten figures at that price… but also that if he starts selling the price will crater. 
 

But anything he gets is pure profit, he’s put nothing in except facist memes and all caps rants.

[Phil1111 1,149]

40 minutes ago, jakee said:

 

But anything he gets is pure profit, he’s put nothing in except facist memes and all caps rants.

Isn't that the real equity of the DJT business model?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Trump demands NBC brings back Johnny Carson.....who has been dead for 20 years.....

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/donald-trump-late-night-show-johnny-carson-b2618266.html

[nigel99 471]

An interesting little statistic. The correlation between frequent lying and cognitive ability is negatively correlated (-0.26, p < 0.001) 

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

Hi folks,

The timing could not be more perfect:  an investigation that counted among its witnesses former Vice President Mike Pence, Ivanka Trump and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows

Special counsel files evidence under seal against Trump in election subversion case | CNN Politics

We will have to wait awhile to see how the above listed rats leave the sinking Trump ship.

When push comes to shove, it usually becomes everyone for themselves.

Jerry Baumchen

 

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

Hi folks,

First, they call him a Lame Duck President with no power.  Then they say he is responsible for the size of the crowds.

Well, DJT; what is it:   So 49,000 people had just gone home, then?

Trump Has a Wild New Theory for His Flagging Crowd Sizes | The New Republic

My theory is that this country is just about fed-up with this idiot.

Jerry Baumchen