Tango01 | 20 Jul 2020 1:16 p.m. PST |
"The Trump administration indicated that it may change the number of U.S. troops in NATO when it threatened to remove those troops from Germany and possibly send them to Poland. While Congress appears to have blocked that step, this festering controversy in NATO over troop levels and participation is not going to disappear. Ever since President Donald Trump took office, he has raised the complaint level by several decibels over the continuing failure of European NATO allies to meet a 2014 agreement to spend at least 2 percent of gross domestic product on their defense budgets by 2021. Of the major powers, Germany is the worst offender, spending only 1.3 percent of its GDP on defense, and not pledging to meet the 2 percent annual goal until 2031…" Main page link Amicalement Armand |
Rudysnelson | 20 Jul 2020 1:30 p.m. PST |
Only if we want it to be over but I do not think we do. |
Chimpy | 20 Jul 2020 1:51 p.m. PST |
Isolationism didn't work that well for the US and the rest of the World prior to WW1 and WW2. And if the US doesn't hold back Russia and China, who will? |
jurgenation | 20 Jul 2020 2:10 p.m. PST |
|
torokchar | 20 Jul 2020 2:12 p.m. PST |
|
Garand | 20 Jul 2020 2:50 p.m. PST |
For anyone that thinks the US is the "police" of the world, keep in mind that each & every time the US has intervened in a conflict since the end of WWII has been done for self interest, not for the grand ideals of justice & democracy. The latter is just something the politicians feed people in order to create a "just cause" for war. When you have the #1 economy in the world that far outstrips much of the competition, the entire world is your marketplace & your supplier. US industry has been fueled as much by resources from Chile or Australia as from Utah or Pennsylvania. So when there is instability in the region that threatens these markets, the government will intervene with grand statements about justice & nobility, but the actual reasons are economic. Something to keep in mind every time someone complains about the US being the world's policeman… Damon. |
Thresher01 | 20 Jul 2020 5:59 p.m. PST |
Doing so for our own interests, as well as those of others doesn't have to be, and isn't mutually exclusive. After crushing Germany, Italy, and Japan in WWII, we did help to rebuild those nations in order to help the people there, and we fought the scourge of communism for more than half a century around the globe, since it is/was a failed economic system and ideology that resulted in the deaths of tens of millions after WWII. Proof that it is an economic failure can be seen in Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Russia, and even China, where the latter has fully embraced capitalism as a superior economic model, while still retaining communist control over the businesses there. The USA now has many, if not most of the resources it needs at home, so can be a lot more isolationist, if we choose to be. That's especially easy now, given the nuclear arsenal we have in place, unlike in previous centuries. |
Tgerritsen | 20 Jul 2020 7:03 p.m. PST |
I'm not convinced the US will even remain as the 50 states it is now in a year. All of this unrest is beyond anything we've seen before. Not sure if it will actually be something so declared as a Civil War as it might be just plain falling into lawlessness, but a house divided against itself cannot stand. Sorry to be so doom and gloom but things look bleak for US internal stability. Time to stock up on leather gear and hockey masks.
|
Stryderg | 20 Jul 2020 8:01 p.m. PST |
After re-reading my response, it got way too political way too fast. So I'll just move along, thanks. |
Chimpy | 20 Jul 2020 8:52 p.m. PST |
Thresher I would argue that nuclear missiles make the USA more vulnerable than in previous centuries since they can hit the USA from any part of the world unlike previous technologies. And you may want to be able to make a less extreme response to threats to your interests than blowing up the world. May be you need to be able to damp down hot spots before they become a major threat. |
Uparmored | 20 Jul 2020 9:54 p.m. PST |
The US is energy independent and the largest single producer of energy thanks to Bush. It has the most diverse and robust economy in the world, as well as the world's largest so I'm pretty sure they're happy to sell to themselves rather than appease Communists. Well if Big T sticks around they are (Last time I put his real name I was banned by the Communists here for even mentioning his name) And I don't care if I get banned for daring to be political on the other side to the editor in a thread that is inherently political. If one person reads my post before it is deleted and expunged and I am banned yet again then I'm happy. We have to speak up, speak the truth. We cannot remain silent or the truth starts to dissappear like it never existed. If others tell the same lies over and over again then most people start to think they are the truth. We have to counter that with facts. Fact 1: US is energy independent for the first time in 75 years because of Bush's policies Fact 2: The US is the largest and most diverse ecnomomy BY FAR. It produces more energy than any other country. Fact 3: Trump doesn't kowtow to anyone, especially Communists. |
pzivh43 | 21 Jul 2020 3:54 a.m. PST |
|
SBminisguy | 21 Jul 2020 9:51 a.m. PST |
China, where the latter has fully embraced capitalism as a superior economic model, while still retaining communist control over the businesses there. Yep, China has evolved from Communism to its evil Socialist twin, Fascism. I'm not convinced the US will even remain as the 50 states it is now in a year. All of this unrest is beyond anything we've seen before. Well, except for 1860 when Democrats hated a Republican President promising reforms that threatened their power so much that they seceded from the Union….say…something seems familiar about that… |
Tango01 | 21 Jul 2020 12:42 p.m. PST |
|
Thresher01 | 21 Jul 2020 1:34 p.m. PST |
Countries and enemies can and always will be able to attack us, but the question is, can they survive the blow-back that quickly follows? |
arealdeadone | 21 Jul 2020 10:52 p.m. PST |
I'm not convinced the US will even remain as the 50 states it is now in a year. All of this unrest is beyond anything we've seen before. Not sure if it will actually be something so declared as a Civil War as it might be just plain falling into lawlessness, but a house divided against itself cannot stand. Sorry to be so doom and gloom but things look bleak for US internal stability. I don't think it will take a year but I agree with your assessment that the future for the US is increasingly bleak. You have a country with decaying infrastructure on a massive scale, growing inequality, an increasingly divided population and deteriorating living standards (even life expectancy in the US has DECLINED since 2014 and some aspects of US healthcare are third world level).
The country is also becoming more authoritarian and less democratic (a trend in most western democracies). Finally demographics – like all western countries the US has an ageing population and is about to hit a turning point whereby it is no longer majority "white European" though the distribution will be extremely fragmented. No doubt Hispanics, African Americans and other significant minorities will seek a redistribution of power. Indeed this is already happening. If these trends continue, I can foresee a time when the Federal Government becomes completely strangled by inertia and bipartisanship and states like California slowly unravel themselves from the US.
but the Union will survive this chapter and hopefully come out of it a stronger, fairer and more democratic [small d and big D] place.This is like the fever that fights an infection. I actually suspect the opposite. You've had 40 years of the middle class shrinking and growing inequality. You've also had 40+ years of general infrastructure decay. Finally you've also had 25 odd years of growing partisanship and dialogue breaking down in the political sphere. Something radical has to happen to reverse these things. And it has to be radical enough to foist a mindset change in the political elites.
|
Skarper | 21 Jul 2020 11:46 p.m. PST |
We do indeed live in interesting times. I'm not an American and do not live there so though it is not such a big factor to me it does influence everywhere so I pay attention to what is going on. The 40+ year decline in the US cannot really continue, there needs to be a rebalancing. Some want to go back to the 50s, which is clearly impossible. Some want to go forward to something better. I'd like to see a return to the 50s in some ways. Higher taxation and more socialist structures which is what actually made America great while also allowing minorities and women who were oppressed to get a fair deal. We somehow need to unpick the global damage sewn by neo-liberalism if we have any chance of reversing the decline. The first step is to restore the status and standard of journalism – it's really appalling now and getting worse. The US needs free independent media or the voters are disinformed. I blame the likes of CNN and MSNBC almost as much as Fox in this regard. When you have a truly free press you can start to work on the judiciary [increasingly politicised in recent decades]. Then you can work on voting rights and participation in elections. Money has to be taken out of politics or voting has no meaning. The plutocrats just buy both parties at present. And – the whites have to accept their time of running everything is coming to an end. I don't want their tyranny replaced by any other but that is not really a realistic fear anyway. The system is pretty much broken. I live in an openly one-party state [the US is less open about their own single party system] without many of the desirable civil liberties US citizens enjoy. Yet we have zero COVID-19 deaths and only a few hundred total cases. Cuba has also coped well compared to the current epicentre of the US followed by Europe and now Brazil. Democracy is making itself look bad. Despite its problems it's better than anything that came before and I'd very much like more freedom and democracy where I live and elsewhere in the world. The world needs places like the US and Europe to set a better example really or it doesn't seem worth the cost to demand change. |
Uparmored | 22 Jul 2020 1:41 a.m. PST |
The 40+ year decline in the US cannot really continue, there needs to be a rebalancing. Wow. US is still number 1 BY FAR. So you're also saying here that the '80s were a period of decline for the US despite Reagan extending the US economic and innovation lead worldwide and defeating the Warsaw Pact without firing a shot? You call that decline? Riiiiighhhhtt…. And – the whites have to accept their time of running everything is coming to an end. Last time I checked you didn't have to be white to be in any position of power in the US. The constitution of the US, the greatest document ever conceived, ensures that. Oh yeah there was also that 2 term US president who was BLACK. I'd like to see a return to the 50s in some ways. Higher taxation and more socialist structures I'd bet you would. No doubt you are comfortable and want to deny others that opportunity. Higher taxation and more socialist structures which is what actually made America great Wow, so the New deal is all that made America great? Not aggressive nation building, land purchases, independent spirit, being willing to fight in massive bloody wars and being willing to take in the brightest and the best from worldwide? None of those made America great? OOOOOOOOkkkkkaaaaaaaaaaaay. while also allowing minorities and women who were oppressed to get a fair deal. The law (in theory) applies the same to everyone. In practice is can go against a white man just as much as it can go against a black man. Depends on the judge. Capitalism is the ultimate equaliser. Money doesn't discriminate. |
Skarper | 22 Jul 2020 2:00 a.m. PST |
I don't want to get into a futile argument and spoil this thread. Others may be convinced by your attempts to counter what I wrote, but I am not. Like I say – let's not argue. I've made my points. |
USAFpilot | 22 Jul 2020 7:37 a.m. PST |
And – the whites have to accept their time of running everything is coming to an end. Did you really just write that racist comment? Are you having a flashback from growing up in South Africa under apartheid? In America the Civil War changed that over 150 years ago. We have non-whites throughout our government; Senators, Judges, and even a former President. Where do you get off writing that racist crap? |
Choctaw | 22 Jul 2020 7:49 a.m. PST |
I'm an American Indian and am tired of the pandering that whites do for minorities. You do not need to apologize for anything in 2020 for things that have happened in the past. We don't need your sympathy. Stop pandering to us. This is the greatest country in the world and everyone has the ability to realize their unlimited potential. But they do have to work hard and stop relying on the past to make excuses as to why they have no future. It's sickening. |
USAFpilot | 22 Jul 2020 9:23 a.m. PST |
+1 Choctaw, absolutely right. |
Thresher01 | 22 Jul 2020 7:05 p.m. PST |
"This is the greatest country in the world and everyone has the ability to realize their unlimited potential. But they do have to work hard and stop relying on the past to make excuses as to why they have no future. It's sickening". Well said. |
arealdeadone | 22 Jul 2020 11:45 p.m. PST |
I think the bigger problem in America is systemic. Pandering to minorities is merely a diversion from the real problems the US has been slowly growing since the 1970s. link
If America overnight became totally racist free and totally accepting of everyone, it would still continue edging over into the abyss. Tolerance does not solve massive inequality, decaying infrastructure or government inertia. |
arealdeadone | 22 Jul 2020 11:57 p.m. PST |
Capitalism is the ultimate equaliser. Money doesn't discriminate. Except pure capitalism like communism is flawed. American living standards were built using a mixed economy, not pure laissez faire capitalism which resulted in endemic poverty, mass exploitation, pollution, labour conflicts, robber barons etc etc. Of course 40 years ago the mixed economy started to be made more neo-liberal to favour the rich. You realise in America right now, 1% of the population has 40% of the wealth and the bottom 80% have 7%. Pure capitalism is not an equaliser. The little guy has no chance against the wealthy who can control laws and economic activity. Money = power. It's that simple.
|
Uparmored | 23 Jul 2020 2:04 a.m. PST |
I'm an American Indian and am tired of the pandering that whites do for minorities. You do not need to apologize for anything in 2020 for things that have happened in the past. We don't need your sympathy. Stop pandering to us. So right. The worst white people treat other coloured people as victims and want to be their saviours, and therefore "good" white people. In Australia it became trendy to thank the local Aboriginal people for the use of the "their" land. It's called "welcome to country". These are routinely done at meetings where no aboriginal people were present for the purposes of white people to signal their own "virtue" and "moral superiority." Look I'm white and I was born in the same time as every Aborigine alive today. I never took their land. In fact I don't own any land, I pay rent to a landlord. I owe Aboriginal people nothing. An Aborigine I lived with who was unemployed with drug and alcohol problems (great guy when he was sober) managed to scrounge to buy an investment property in Darwin with his extra welfare payments (that he gets because of the system that treats Aborigines as victims, so surprise surprise, they ACT like victims – I would drink all day too if I had a free rental I could never get kicked out of (he got public housing after he lived with me) and welfare payments I could never get cut off from – all because of my DNA) When I was asked to give the "welcome to country" at a recent work meeting I thanked the landlords of our building, "Phum Corporation". At first people were shocked. Then some others started to speak up, "yeah, why do we do that?". Then we stopped doing it. |
Uparmored | 23 Jul 2020 2:13 a.m. PST |
You realise in America right now, 1% of the population has 40% of the wealth and the bottom 80% have 7%. yeah I realise. That's because the people at the top of corporations make the most, and each corporation employs thousands who make less than the investors. But the great thing is, in capitalism, those workers can invest and get in on the action too. Or they can start their own corporation. The people at the top of communist societies are put there by the state and you can never try to remove them or be like them, unless you want to face the firing squad. |
arealdeadone | 23 Jul 2020 4:26 a.m. PST |
Uparmoured assuming they have disposable income to invest in shares after paying for life's everyday necessities which increasingly many can't. Most shareholders on the planet are other rich people or big companies. The people at the top of communist countries are the same as people at the top of corporations- ambitious, Machiavellian, ruthless and often displaying sociopathic tendencies (yep psychological studies have shown that many successful executives share same psychological traits as violent psychopaths). |
Asteroid X | 23 Jul 2020 8:58 a.m. PST |
The people at the top of communist countries are the same as people at the top of corporations- ambitious, Machiavellian, ruthless and often displaying sociopathic tendencies (yep psychological studies have shown that many successful executives share same psychological traits as violent psychopaths). They are also ALL loyal party members. The most loyal. That tells immensely about that ideology. Not all are that way in our system. It's not fair, greed is part of fallen human nature, but it is very different from the other main one. Historically speaking, capitalism and communism are very new constructs yet are presented as the sole options today. Do you have any links to the studies for the corporate bosses? (Not arguing I have an interest; professionally). |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 23 Jul 2020 11:47 a.m. PST |
Liberal democracies as a political system are being tested today like never before. Decades of globalist economic policies have resulted in specialized and highly unbalanced economies with stark socio-economic divisions and a shrinking middle class, exposing the "American Dream" to be a lie and fueling discontent along lines of class and race. America had been the "shining city on a hill" which other nations strived to emulate, celebrating its melting pot of peoples regardless of their social, racial and religious differences. But when people are unhappy with their lives and condition, they have the power and liberties to rebel and revolt against the central authority, as we're currently seeing in places like Chicago, Atlanta, Portland and elsewhere. Unfortunately, the increasing chaos and social unrest we're witnessing in the country will only embolden autocracies and make authoritarian regimes like homogeneous China believe the policies it undertook in Hong Kong and Xinjiang are correct. Indeed, with the growing number of autocracies and so-called "illiberal democracies," western liberal democracies may already have lost much of their glamor and appeal. |
Walking Sailor | 23 Jul 2020 3:16 p.m. PST |
assuming they have disposable income to invest in shares…which increasingly many can't. Not shares, education. One of the three biggest factors in leaving poverty is "finish high school". Perhaps the biggest factor which can be controlled by an individual is higher education. link see Figure 3. exposing the "American Dream" to be a lie and fueling discontent along lines of class and race. It's still good; see Figure 1 in the above link. Intergenerational economic mobility (the topic of Figure 2) is further explored here: PDF link . Warning: getting into the weeds. western liberal democracies may already have lost much of their glamor and appeal. Although I cannot cite data, anecdotally, no one swims either the Rio Grand River or the Mediterranean Sea South-bound. As regards the OP's question; I would hope that the rest of the world would behave themselves so that we wouldn't need to be "The Cops of The World". We're getting tired of parenting adults. |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 23 Jul 2020 3:52 p.m. PST |
It's still good; see Figure 1 in the above link. Intergenerational economic mobility (the topic of Figure 2) is further explored here: PDF link. Depends on what the "American Dream" means to you. From your first link: For some, the American Dream means becoming richer than one's parents. By that standard, the results are reassuring. But if the American Dream means rising in rank in the income distribution, then the findings are not so encouraging. In this case, an individual's ability to reach the highest economic ranks of society seems at least partially determined by the income rank into which they were born. From your second PDF link: Intergenerational mobility, on average, is significantly lower in the United States than in most other developed countries. However, mobility varies widely within the United States Half of all Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck as the economic impact of the pandemic has exposed, forcing them to rely on massive and unprecedented federal stimulus aid. That's hardly what I would call living the "American Dream." The US can no longer afford to play World Police. |
arealdeadone | 23 Jul 2020 4:01 p.m. PST |
Do you have any links to the studies for the corporate bosses? (Not arguing I have an interest; professionally). There's been a bit of work in this area but here's a couple : link PDF link Note psychopathy like any psychological trait or disorder is a spectrum.
|
arealdeadone | 23 Jul 2020 4:18 p.m. PST |
Although I cannot cite data, anecdotally, no one swims either the Rio Grand River or the Mediterranean Sea South-bound. The issue here is the third world is infinitely worse than the decaying west at its worst. But given how much discontent we're seeing from migrant groups (eg Islamist radicalisation or recently BLM protests outside of the US), its clear that their expectations of the west haven't been met. |
Walking Sailor | 23 Jul 2020 8:26 p.m. PST |
From your first link:For some, the American Dream means becoming richer than one's parents. By that standard, the results are reassuring. But if the American Dream means rising in rank in the income distribution, then the findings are not so encouraging. In this case, an individual's ability to reach the highest economic ranks of society seems at least partially determined by the income rank into which they were born. emphasis added by second quoter Also from my first link: Figure 3 shows that a college education can counter the effects of birthright…One interpretation is that education is a way for individuals to overcome birth circumstances. From my post education. One of the three biggest factors in leaving poverty is "finish high school". Perhaps the biggest factor which can be controlled by an individual is higher education. link see Figure 3. In regards birthright, with the possible exception of Hindus gaining Karma, one cannot control the circumstances of one's birth. In regards education, in America a high school education is free to all, and higher education, while not free, is available. Mobility is a choice. The American Dream is that the individual is free to chose. Half of all Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck as the economic impact of the pandemic has exposed, ? Americans have had the lowest savings rate of the western world for decades! Anyone who has just learned this is either very young, or just hasn't been looking at the numbers. Unfortunately, America's high standard of living is due in large part to choosing to spend on that high standard at the expense of their savings. Now they are getting caught short and will make up the shortfall by indebting our children and grand-children. (the national debt is a pet peeve for which we need a whole 'nother post, perhaps in the Fez) The US can no longer afford to play World Police. Amen, brother |