+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Social Club (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Blah-Blah Bar (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-23.html)
+--- Thread: Trumpled (Alternative Leading) (/thread-2312.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Mav - 06-09-2016
IBWT, your last reason is the only one that has any merit imo. It's hard to say what Trump would do in the Middle East. He paints himself as am isolationist who wouldn't allow the US to bear the brunt of other countries' battles. On the other hand, he says he'd kill ISIS by any means even if it involves waterboarding and killing the families of their members.
A big theme in his campaign is that he'd insist that European and Middle Eastern countries should fund any military effort and provide much of the manpower as they are most affected by the current insurgency. Saudi Arabia is the ultimate free rider. Even when it invaded Yemen, it needed Pakistani troops to do the dirty work. With the Oil-producing States already facing drastic revenue reductions, extracting money from them will be problematic.
So would he send in troops to fight on the ground? I'm sure he knows how well that has worked in Afghanistan and Iraq and more importantly the size and duration of such commitments. He'd also be up against the Russians if he sends troops into Syria. Would he team up with Putin and Al-Assad to fight ISIS? Iran is fighting on that side too, so this would very much be a case of strange bedfellows. It would pit the US against Saudi Arabia which is sponsoring the non-ISIS rebels (and Russia is targetting them more than ISIS). Even attempting to enforce a no-fly zone in Syria could spark a military response from Russia.
So would he limit himself to surgical aerial bombing? Newsflash - that's already happening and it's doubtful that there could be any useful increase in these efforts.
Remember, he condemns the US support of the rebellion in Libya which deposed (and killed) Gadaffi. But when he was reminded that he did support it at the time it was happening and called for Gadaffi's removal, he said they should just have had a surgical strike which killed Gadaffi and his advisers.
Sadly, Trump can't just call in the A-Team or Rambo to fix the Middle East.
There's also the question of whether the Middle East's geo-political importance requires the US to intervene. Petrol is becoming less important. The US has increased its domestic production to IIRC 65% of its needs and technological advances both in oil exploitation and alternative energy will see that figure climb. OPEC has lost its ability to restrict supply and consequently push up prices. The oil producers are flooding the market and the price has collapsed. Some Middle Eastern states such as Dubai will run out of oil within a few years. All of them are already experiencing massive cuts in revenue which may well create internal unrest. Does America really need to bog itself down in an area which is losing its geopolitical importance?
Of course, there is a humanitarian issue at play in Syria. But that's also the case in Nigeria and many other African countries. Boko Haram is their local equivalent of ISIS/Al Qaeda. Where is the international intervention? Nigeria has some oil but African countries don't have enough geo-political importance to warrant intervention.
But then you have ISIS' desire to export terrorism and the fact it has caused a flood of refugees which is stressing European countries. Just how is Trump going to go about limiting their influence? Even if he does mount a military intervention and it liberates land occupied by ISIS, would that kill off terrorism? Would it make it safe for refugees to return?' Remember that Iraq is half of ISIS' empire and the US liberated that over a decade ago and the US hasn't tamed the Taliban in Afghanistan either. The reality is that Trump and ISIS would both benefit from a continuing war of words with each driving support for the other in an increasingly polarised world.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - madbluboy - 06-09-2016
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/07/trump-makes-his-case-for-sanders-supporters.html
Quote:"To all of those Bernie Sanders voters who have been left out in the cold by a rigged system of superdelegates, we welcome you with open arms," Trump said. "And by the way, the terrible trade deals that Bernie is so vehemently against — and he's right on that — will be taken care of far better than anyone ever thought possible."
"This election isn't about Republican or Democrat, it's about who runs this country: special interests or the people," he said. "Why would politicians want to change a system that's totally rigged to keep them in power? That's what they're doing folks. Why would politicians want to change a system that's made them and their friends very very wealthy?"
"I beat a rigged system by winning with overwhelming support — the only way you could've done it," Trump added. "We can't fix a rigged system by relying ... on the very people who rigged it."
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - DJC - 06-09-2016
There's nothing worse than a politician who claims that he/she is not a politician. Well, perhaps there is; a politician who doesn't know that he is a politician.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - laj - 06-09-2016
(06-08-2016, 11:22 PM)Inboltswetrust link Wrote:I agree. I think Trump win hands down. I actually like him. He's funny and has a bit of charisma. Also he wants to get the terrorists big time. Good. In terms of his war mongering ways, I think we need a strong America, otherwise we could be screwed with the expansion of china. Go the trumpster. And I got $7 in early markets
Not sure, I think Hilary almost has a free pass to the White House being up against Trump. She won't get beaten. Last thing we need is some idiot from the lunatic fringe running the USA.
Wonder if Hilary will get revenge on Bill and find herself a male "Monica"...lol.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Baggers - 06-09-2016
Every empire eventually crashes and needs a lunatic in charge to oversee and ensure the crash is total and spectacular.
Then you can rebuild it without the sins of the past... you'd hope.
On the other hand, it's hard to imagine that the FBI, CIA or other secret US agency hasn't got Trump in their sights.
I wonder if there is any truth in the rumour that smart US citizens are heading to Canada and Mexica with the hope that any walls that are built will keep the Yanks out!!!
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - cookie2 - 06-09-2016
(06-09-2016, 01:35 AM)laj link Wrote:Not sure, I think Hilary almost has a free pass to the White House being up against Trump. She won't get beaten. Last thing we need is some idiot from the lunatic fringe running the USA.
Wonder if Hilary will get revenge on Bill and find herself a male "Monica"...lol.
Wonder if Bill would be all that bothered?
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Mav - 06-09-2016
OMG, he is a special interest. It's like a fox telling the chooks that he'll protect them.
There are at least 2 different groups in Sanders' camp: blue collar workers and pogressive millenials. Trump may well appeal to the former but he's unlikely to appeal to the latter.
The blue collar workers who have seen their jobs move overseas and have no hope or interest in moving into other types of work may well like those such as Sanders and Trump who condemn trade deals that accelerated that process. This group can also be quite socially conservative and may share an antipathy to minority groups they might regard as stealing their birthrights. But would they really believe that Trump would be more interested in helping them rather than the rich?
The millenials/progressives aren't just after an extreme candidate. They want one who will push their concerns. Is a self-professed Billionaire the guy to reform campaign contributions? His claim that he self-funded his primary campaign was a point of difference. It was also a bit misleading as he loaned his campaign the money and can pay himself back now he is taking money from wealthy backers. Now, he's raising money and benefitting from SuperPacs just like any other politician. Would Sanders' 'process activists' think that self-funded Billionaires would answer their concerns or do they want to open up the presidency to those without wealth or wealthy backers? I think the latter. Those who want to crack down on Wall Street and corporate excesses and reverse the trend of the top 1% making out like bandits at the expense of the bottom 90% are not likely to see Trump as a saviour. And certainly those fighting against discrimination against minorities won't have a bar of him.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - laj - 06-09-2016
(06-07-2016, 07:13 AM)mateinone link Wrote:Trump will be the next president of the USA, barring an absolutely stupendous crash (which of course is also possible with Trump), he will kill Clinton.
He is hated by many, especially women and that was meant to stop him in the Red Neck primaries, but it didn't.
Hilary Clinton is just about as loathed as Trump, but nowhere near as loved. There are a lot of people that believe Trump can be the next Reagan. They believe he can come out strong and take on all the challenges facing America the next 8 years and they are significant.
The economy (apparently because he is a billionaire he will have all the answers here)
China's expansion
Russia's Militarization
ISIS, the Middle East, Worldwide & Domestic Terrorism.
Immigration Controls (legal and illegal)
These are just a few of the issues America consider to be threatening the existence of America... or A Great America.
I think Bernie had a chance against Trump, I don't think Hilary has any. I might end up eating my words here, but Trump was still paying $5 - $6 when he was in front in polls in The Red Neck Primary because people expected the joke to end and people to come to their senses, now they are starting to realise he can win it.
People say Hilary's loathed but she very easily beat a very popular candidate in Sanders. Many a PM has been loathed but they voted in easily because they can do the job. Politics isn't a popularity contest and people know that. Hilary will win very easily.
If Bernie had a chance to beat Trump, but Hilary smashed Bernie, then you'd think with much of the same people voting then Hilary will pump Trump. Many Republican supporters who were anti-Trump and his lunatic ideas will vote for Clinton.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - cookie2 - 06-09-2016
(06-09-2016, 01:40 AM)Baggers link Wrote:Every empire eventually crashes and needs a lunatic in charge to oversee and ensure the crash is total and spectacular.
Then you can rebuild it without the sins of the past... you'd hope.
On the other hand, it's hard to imagine that the FBI, CIA or other secret US agency hasn't got Trump in their sights.
I wonder if there is any truth in the rumour that smart US citizens are heading to Canada and Mexica with the hope that any walls that are built will keep the Yanks out!!!
Reminds me of the Kenny Everett observation on this
Britain was once a kingdom and it had a king,
Then it became an empire and had an empress.
Finally it became just a country and Margaret Thatcher was in charge.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Baggers - 06-09-2016
(06-09-2016, 01:44 AM)cookie2 link Wrote:Reminds me of the Kenny Everett observation on this
Britain was once a kingdom and it had a king,
Then it became an empire and had an empress.
Finally it became just a country and Margaret Thatcher was in charge.
Hahahahahaha... I so remember that, what a ripper he was....