Recommended Posts

On 11/14/2016 at 7:10 AM, Jeffery Mewtamer said:

But is Trump actually a successful business man? As in, ran a business that regularly, if not consistantly turned a profit. I knew nothing of the man prior to his nomination, but I've gotten the impression that he's made himself quite wealthy while leaving a trail of failed businesses, broken promises, and disgruntled customers. If that makes him a successful business man, I don't want to meet an unsuccessful one.

Trump had hundreds of successful businesses and only a handful of failed ones. I can't remember the exact number but he had a success rate of over 90%. It'd be ridiculous to think that there wouldn't be a few failures over hundreds of businesses. Unless you want someone who's like Timothy Dexter or something in which case I have nothing to say.

On 11/14/2016 at 7:10 AM, Jeffery Mewtamer said:

FDR dragged us into WWII.

You're kidding right? The Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor would have caused USA to go to war no matter who the President was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no history buff, but Congress circa 1941 had not declaring war on Japan as a completely valid option, and as far as I know, the president has no obligation to act upon a declaration of War from Congress. Furthermore, even if the false unichotomy that declaring war on Japan and wrongly imprisoning Japanese-Americans en masse following Pearl Harbor held up under scrutiny, to my knowledge, the declaration of war on Nazi Germany was completely unprovoked.

Besides, if Switzerland, a small, landlocked country bordering several major players from both World Wars could not only stay out of both World Wars, but maintain peace for the last two centuries, it raises the question of why the United States, a massive, continent spanning country literally an ocean away from the conflict couldn't accomplish the same feat. My leading hypothesis is that the US has a tradition of War as strong as Switzerland's Tradition of Neutrality.

Now, if Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan had actually Invaded the continental US, which I'm not convinced either had any plans to do so, the US would've been completely within its rights to repel the invasion, but to my knowledge, the War of 1812 was the last time the US was invaded by a foreign military force.

Perhaps the world is better off than any realistic scenario that would have come out of the US refusing to get involved in WWII, but I can't bring myself to call the US's actions during the 1940s good, and while some have described the US as the world's police force, the only metaphor I'm comfortable using to describe US foreign policy post-WWII is that the US is a bully, and to be quite honest, I don't expect Trump to do anything to improve this image of the US even if he decides to play nice with the other Bully on the playground of global politics(i.e. Russia).

As for the business comments, hundreds of businesses suggest that either the average lifespan of each business was very short or that Trump had so many running concurrent that there's no way he could have a direct hand in the operations of all of them, neither possibility doing much to erode the impression that he made billions on the blood, sweat, and tears of others.

Also, no clue who this Timothy Dexter person is.

Though, honestly, I'd rather have a president who never rose above upper middle class because they were too busy doing more worthwhile things to pursue massive monetary wealth. Give me the schoolteacher who enriched the minds of generations of school children, the doctor who not only extended the lives of their patients, but improved their quality of life while favoring treatments with the most bang for buck so that even the uninsured poor could afford their services, or the police officer who arrested many dangerous criminals, turned a blind eye to illegal, non-criminal acts, and has never had a suspect or bystander hospitalized on their watch over the career politician, prosecuting lawyer who pushes for harsh punishment, or billionaire businessman who cares more about their bank accounts thean their employees and customers any day.

For the record, I voted for the medical doctor over the career politician, the apparently quantity over quality businessman, and the former New Mexican Governor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Jeffery Mewtamer said:

words

A great post, as always, but there is a certain thing that I can't agree with. It's not that I completely disagree, but I'd like to expand it a bit. You say that " I don't expect Trump to do anything to improve this image of the US even if he decides to play nice with the other Bully on the playground of global politics(i.e. Russia)". While that is true and the image of the US can't be improved overnight (just like the image of any other country - people remember, and the old habits are exactly what brought the world to the point where it is now), things were much safer when two big dogs who had the mutual respect for each other were around.

25 years after the USSR's collapse, it's clear that we, humans, can't coexist with each other peacefully. The bloc mentality that was supposed to disappear once the war of ideologies was over is still there. Fukuyama's "end of history" was but a fleeting dream. After the strike of terrible fiascos of so-called "liberal democracy" in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria and god knows where else, it's clear that the system is not working as it should. I truly share your opinion on the perfect president for any country, but I don't think we'll see anyone like that emerging for the next couple of decades. At least not as you see them. Didn't you know that Bashar al-Assad is a doctor (ophtalmologist, to be precise) and he only became the heir of his father because his older brother died in a car accident? And look how much bashing he's getting now, both deserved and undeserved.

Maybe, just maybe, Trump will make the first step towards bridging the gap, because Killary certainly wouldn't. The system that we had back then was anything but perfect, but it stopped the US from its unholy crusade against the regimes it doesn't like. If old rules are not working, let's write the new rules together. Let's make love, not war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I confess to knowing little about modern politics throughout most of the world, but barring something that turns the existing political landscape on its head, I don't have much faith the governments of the world will accomplish much in the near future. Hell, it's been 240 years since Thomas Jefferson wrote "all men are created equal" and the US is still a ways from embodying the ideal expressed by those five words, and if anything, I fear the longer lifespans of humans today compared to a few short centuries ago will cause social and political progress to slow.

I have hope for the future, but most of it lies with scientists working to expand the total sum of human knowledge and engineers working to apply that knowledge to improving existing technology and creating new technology, and even in those spheres, I fear the potential politics have to hinder progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-12-10 at 10:33 AM, Lisk said:

 If old rules are not working, let's write the new rules together. Let's make love, not war.

;_;7

PRESIDENT LISK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lisk for President 2020

23 hours ago, KozmoFox said:

;_;7

PRESIDENT LISK

 

Edited by EthanDaOmoWIz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2016 at 11:10 PM, Jeffery Mewtamer said:

I'm no history buff, but Congress circa 1941 had not declaring war on Japan as a completely valid option, and as far as I know, the president has no obligation to act upon a declaration of War from Congress. Furthermore, even if the false unichotomy that declaring war on Japan and wrongly imprisoning Japanese-Americans en masse following Pearl Harbor held up under scrutiny, to my knowledge, the declaration of war on Nazi Germany was completely unprovoked.

Besides, if Switzerland, a small, landlocked country bordering several major players from both World Wars could not only stay out of both World Wars, but maintain peace for the last two centuries, it raises the question of why the United States, a massive, continent spanning country literally an ocean away from the conflict couldn't accomplish the same feat. My leading hypothesis is that the US has a tradition of War as strong as Switzerland's Tradition of Neutrality.

Now, if Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan had actually Invaded the continental US, which I'm not convinced either had any plans to do so, the US would've been completely within its rights to repel the invasion, but to my knowledge, the War of 1812 was the last time the US was invaded by a foreign military force.

Perhaps the world is better off than any realistic scenario that would have come out of the US refusing to get involved in WWII, but I can't bring myself to call the US's actions during the 1940s good, and while some have described the US as the world's police force, the only metaphor I'm comfortable using to describe US foreign policy post-WWII is that the US is a bully, and to be quite honest, I don't expect Trump to do anything to improve this image of the US even if he decides to play nice with the other Bully on the playground of global politics(i.e. Russia).

As for the business comments, hundreds of businesses suggest that either the average lifespan of each business was very short or that Trump had so many running concurrent that there's no way he could have a direct hand in the operations of all of them, neither possibility doing much to erode the impression that he made billions on the blood, sweat, and tears of others.

Also, no clue who this Timothy Dexter person is.

Though, honestly, I'd rather have a president who never rose above upper middle class because they were too busy doing more worthwhile things to pursue massive monetary wealth. Give me the schoolteacher who enriched the minds of generations of school children, the doctor who not only extended the lives of their patients, but improved their quality of life while favoring treatments with the most bang for buck so that even the uninsured poor could afford their services, or the police officer who arrested many dangerous criminals, turned a blind eye to illegal, non-criminal acts, and has never had a suspect or bystander hospitalized on their watch over the career politician, prosecuting lawyer who pushes for harsh punishment, or billionaire businessman who cares more about their bank accounts thean their employees and customers any day.

For the record, I voted for the medical doctor over the career politician, the apparently quantity over quality businessman, and the former New Mexican Governor.

Once the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the war became a personal thing to Americans. Americans are patriots who take attacks on their country very seriously (eg. 9/11; I'm sure you were around when it happened), especially unprovoked ones. And they never forget. I can't say whether imprisoning Japanese-Americans was a right move, but they had every reason to take action for Pearl Harbor (for personal pride if nothing else). And if you declare war on Japan there's nothing wrong with declaring war on Japan's allies (the enemy of my enemy and all that). Besides, Britain were on friendly terms with USA and there was nothing wrong in helping an ally out.

By the way, Switzerland wasn't attacked for the main reason that it's hard to breach its numerous natural defences and it's plain not worth the trouble invading it. And it's more likely that the major powers just wanted an excuse to flex their muscles while smaller countries just wanted to survive than anything else.

I can't tell you much about Trump's businesses but I just wanted to say that saying that he sucks at doing business just because some of his businesses failed is plain wrong.

Timothy Dexter was someone who made business decisions that looked bad on paper (eg. selling coal to Newcastle) but by sheer dumb luck (eg. coal miners happened to go on strike) worked out well.

In hindsight, Hillary Clinton may have been a poor choice for the Democrats. But when she became their nominee, she was also touted as a great choice by many due to her 3 decades experience in politics and her achievements during that time and so on (not that it'd mean much to you). That said, Bernie Sanders would probably have been the kind of person you'd want as president. I wouldn't rule him out of the running for the next election.

Also for those who want Lisk as president, you have to be a natural born US citizen for that, last I checked.

Edited by LameJoker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LameJoker said:

Also for those who want Lisk as president, you have to be a natural born US citizen for that, last I checked.

By the time that would happen we would cast our differences aside and join our forces as the Union of Sovereign Secular Republics, formed and shaped around the goal of space exploration and expanding the humankind's area of influence ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2016 at 8:25 AM, Jeffery Mewtamer said:

Best I can tell, the cold war never ended, every president since at least FDR has overseen at least one armed conflict involving the US, and neither Trump or Hilary showed any signs of truly being crazy enough to launch nukes and I pray to any gods that might exist that the President couldn't unilaterally order the launch of a nuke and that anyone who might be in the position to be order to pull the trigger/turn the key/press the button has enough common sense to decide refusing an order to launch a nuke is perfectly justified and has the guts to refuse at gunpoint.

And even if we got a true pacifist in the Oval Office, they'd have trouble dismantling the military industrial complex without causing a recession.

The US and Russia have been locked in a dick waving contest for longer than most people have been alive, longer than the Internet and personal computers have existed, longer than humans have had the capacity to reach the moon, longer than the European Union has existed, longer than China has been a major exporter of manufactured goods. The list of world altering events that have had little or no affect on the Russia-America rivalry goes on. Do you honestly think anything short of cataclysmic or apocalyptic is going to suddenly topple a status quo that has remained essentially unchanged despite large parts of the social, economic, and political maps having been redrawn several times?

I Reiterate, the actions of consumer electronics and social media companies will have more impact on the masses than anything the government does over the next four years.

Until recently, my friend's uncle was the man that would give the order to launch a missile in any circumstance, and he is an extremely sensible, grounded man.  I doubt his replacement will be any different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.