World, Writing, Wealth discussion

40 views

Comments Showing 1-50 of 84 (84 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Mehreen (new)

Mehreen Ahmed (mehreen2) | 1911 comments Who did Obama wage a war against?


message 2: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin Technically, he continued the War on Terror started by Bush and actively targeted Al Quaeda and ISIS terrorists with drone strikes and airstrikes. He however did not go to war with any state, contrary to George Bush, who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama did continue maintaining troops in those two countries, so you could say that he continued the wars there.


message 3: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2792 comments He did of course withdraw most of the US troops from Iraq and many from Afghanistan. He joined in the operations in Libya. Ordered air strikes in Syria - supported with Special Forces and there have been drone strikes in Yemen, Somalia etc.. I'm sure there are others we know little about e.g. operations in Africa in Nigeria and Uganda.

Not wars but military action none the less.


message 4: by Uri (new)

Uri Norwich | 33 comments Mehreen,Michael and Philip, all have valid and factual input. However, their view reflects of a forigner looking from the outside in.
If you believe the cnns of the world and the alphabet soup of the American mass medi, half of the 320mln legal Americans (and at least half of 10 mln illegals) know that Obama waged the war against our Constitution, the only law that separates us from a dictatorship (communism, fascism and other isms).
He also waged the war against the police and as a consequence, against his own blacks (welcome to Chicago folks).
He almost killed our economy through EPA regulations.
He almost destroyed the best health system in the world (all you forigners with money come here---you cannot wait your turn till your public health system gives you a number to be operated).
This list wouldn't have no end...luckily, we have the damage being reversed now, and you can come and get your health problems fixe.The American Deluge


message 5: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments Mehreen wrote: "Who did Obama wage a war against?"

I think Obama will be remembered as one of the least trigger happy presidents and his term is characterized by very reserve military involvement anywhere...


message 6: by Jimmy (new)

Jimmy Uri wrote: "Mehreen,Michael and Philip, all have valid and factual input. However, their view reflects of a forigner looking from the outside in.
If you believe the cnns of the world and the alphabet soup of t..."


That's some list, Uri. Can you name just one EPA regulation that "almost killed our economy"?


message 7: by Philip (last edited Feb 04, 2017 07:42AM) (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2792 comments Uri wrote: "Mehreen,Michael and Philip, all have valid and factual input. However, their view reflects of a forigner looking from the outside in.
If you believe the cnns of the world and the alphabet soup of t..."


I must have missed a constitutional amendment in the last 8 years or its repeal?
I think it's 6 of the last 8 years congress and senate had republican majorities
The edict overruled by federal court yesterday was because it was unconstitutional and against immigration acts
Yes the alphabet soup of media does not give Trump a fair ride - he's only doing what he said he was going to do after all. It's just that given he was acting as a politician no one believed him.
Let's have some facts - in what way did Obama destroy the US economy

https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/e...

since 2009 lowest growth rate 1.43% highest 2.43%
Unemployment rate 10% in 2009 reducing to 4.6% in Nov 2016 and that's with a growing population
https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/e...


EPA regulations - I don't know enough to comment, but most of Europe would be desperate to have those numbers. UK has also faired fairly well in that time period whereas the rest of the EU has not (another Brexit underlying cause)

As for health problems - despite what many believe in the US, I would not exchange the UK's NHS for the US system. Not because its brilliant but because for the average person it provides a fundamentally good service at no cost at the point of use - i.e. tax pays. Just because one or two people go to the states or elsewhere in the world for treatment does not mean the majority do. If you are a black low wage worker in a major US city I do into think you would describe the health system as the best in the World. Compared to what?

Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Canada even Cuba? The healthcare available (if you have the money via wealth or insurance) is fantastic in the US - I experienced it myself when I lived there but it is not a system for all. I was lucky I had access to both military and private insurance. Most do not.

"Gallup reported in July 2014 that the uninsured rate among adults 18 and over fell from 18.0% in Q3 2013 to 13.4% by Q2 2014. Rand Corporation had similar findings. According to the United States Census Bureau, in 2012 there were 48.0 million people in the US (15.4% of the population) who were without health insurance."

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Num...

So much for Obamacare. 45 million plus out of 320 million plus show me where this is a better statistic than most of the rest of the main countries in the world.

How about statistics on life expectancy, teenage pregnancy, diseases, child mortality - i could go on - I don't see the US at the top of any of these comparisons.

Trump no matter how good a President he turns out to be nor Obama can fix this overnight. It takes years for these statistics to improve. Five to seven years to get a junior doctor in place. four years of college for a teacher to improve education - I could go on.

Meanwhile the war on crime, on drugs goes on Obama did not stop that but neither has any administration. I don't need to be living in the US to read facts not opinion.


message 8: by Matthew (last edited Feb 04, 2017 10:15AM) (new)

Matthew Williams (houseofwilliams) Uri wrote: "Mehreen,Michael and Philip, all have valid and factual input. However, their view reflects of a forigner looking from the outside in.
If you believe the cnns of the world and the alphabet soup of t..."


Uri, Under Obama, millions of uninsured Americans received health care coverage for the first time. The US medical system is far from the best in the world. In fact, prior to the ACA 48 million Americans didn't have basic insurance! He also reversed the worst economic catastrophe since 1929, where 8 million US jobs were lost, and turned it into a 11 million job gain. He also turned the extreme low felt by the stock market in 2008 to extreme high by 2016, and he did it all without ever violating the constitution.

It sounds like you are in the "don't trust the mainstream media" camp, and get your news from alt-right websites and other phony journalism. Not trying to be insulting, but how else could you believe such baseless rhetoric and "alternative facts"? You seriously need to consult your sources and your dogmatic beliefs, because they don't accord with reality one bit.


message 9: by Uri (new)

Uri Norwich | 33 comments Hi,
I try to answer in one post your comments.
To Philip:
- there is no such definition as "an average person," unless you work for the government or receive their donations in various forms
- every person is an individual with his(hers) own set of health issues
-God forbid you would need a medical procedure a bit more serious than removing a splinter from your finger...You will get a number from your NHS to get in line and hope that it will come before you dead. In that case, you still can come to our-no-good US health care, but expect to pay.

To Jim re. EPA regulations.
That topic I happened to know intimately, since I have been making living out of trading those regulations. Here are the ones, I was involved in,
-- Canadian oil industry got stuck in their Sands---no pipelines allowed, thanks to EPA.
---Coal Industry, all but died---clean coal requirements
---California water shortage---thanks to EPA again---no new aqueduct building from Colorado
--- Ethanol---long story, you can google it all.
----Unconstitutional appropriation of private property "land grabbing," under pretense of "preserving some birds and turtles." No farming is allowed.

Amazingly, Wall St. has found ways make money of it, predicting correctly any new EPA regulations.

I can go on and on, but suggest following our President reversing all of those and many more through the executives orders. It will be (it is already with Coal industry) the best proof of my list.


message 10: by Matthew (new)

Matthew Williams (houseofwilliams) Yes, you could on and on. Unfortunately, it wouldn't make it any less rambling or baseless. You were asked to provide source information, all you've done here is post additional personal opinions. Show how Obama harmed the American economy or violated the Constitution.


message 11: by Uri (new)

Uri Norwich | 33 comments Go to EPA SITE.


message 12: by Matthew (new)

Matthew Williams (houseofwilliams) And the EPA website is not going to prove how Obama ruined the economy through EPA regulation? Yeah, okay. Or, you could actually post something that demonstrates a link between Obama's enforcement of those regulations and economic downturn. If you can't do that, I would say the point is conceded.

FYI< telling other people to "google" what you said, or to go to some website to look up what you said, it kind of lazy and a cop out.


message 13: by Uri (new)

Uri Norwich | 33 comments Well Matthew, I will give it one more try...
1. If you cannot read and understand EPA regulations on their website, so 95% of the American people. That was the idea of Obama's.
2. I sent you over there to spare space on this string. It took them 8 long years to come up with all that nonsense under a pretense of the so-called global warming.
3. Amazingly, every person who got involved with this string is not a US Sitizen, except may be for Jim. You do not have skin in the game. That is exactly we have voted for---America for Americans first. Then we may listen to foreigners. For now, watch how EPA is going to fold and fast.


message 14: by Jimmy (new)

Jimmy What absolute nonsense, Uri.

You actually view climate change as made up? Maybe you need to google some science.


message 15: by Uri (new)

Uri Norwich | 33 comments Jim,
Science is a flexible matter. Based on my past experience in electrical engineering, we classified science in two groups.
Exact science, based on laws of physics, math, etc. If an airplane went down because of engineering miscalculations, that would be considered an exact science and required new calculations.

There is a made-up science cattering to the powers.

40 years ago, those scientist were screeming bloody global Cooling. You are old enough to remember that. I am not, so I google it and see covers of magazins and papers of the period.
Same "scientist" supply any fixed data to support their grants for global warming. The hand that feeds you...
So what science do you belong to?


message 16: by Alex (new)

Alex (asato) Uri wrote: "3. Amazingly, every person who got involved with this string is not a US Sitizen, except may be for Jim. You do not have skin in the game. That is exactly we have voted for---America for Americans first. Then we may listen to foreigners. For now, watch how EPA is going to fold and fast."

the veracity of a statement doesn't depend on whether one is a US citizen or not. what matters is whether the statement is based on something that can be verified and vetted. stating that someone's statements are invalid because of their group membership is throwing in a distraction by falsely implying their motives (and a typical rhetoric technique).

Uri wrote: "2. I sent you over there to spare space on this string. It took them 8 long years to come up with all that nonsense under a pretense of the so-called global warming."

sending someone to an entire domain isn't helping the discussion. the burden of proof is on the person making the assertion. this is another typical rhetorical technique called evasion.


message 17: by Graeme (last edited Feb 04, 2017 02:12PM) (new)

Graeme Rodaughan | 7000 comments WRT the constitution you could start with the ACLU at

[1] https://www.aclu.org/feature/indefini...

and

[2] https://www.aclu.org/other/talking-po...

REF: ACLU: "On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA’s dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president — and all future presidents — to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield."


Thanks to Obama's signature (rather than veto) these extraordinary powers are now in the hands of Donald Trump and anyone who comes after him.

Have a good think about this. You can be detained anywhere in the world including CONUS by the US military without charge, or trial, simply on suspicion.

Can anyone here reconcile that with the Bill of Rights as it stands right now.

Note also, that the definition of "terrorist" is a matter of political whim.

Elements under threat are primarily the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th amendments. REF: WIKI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...


message 18: by Alex (new)

Alex (asato) Graeme Rodaughan wrote: "WRT the constitution you could start with the ACLU at

[1] https://www.aclu.org/feature/indefini...

and

[2..."


excellent. this is a million times more helpful.


message 19: by Jimmy (new)

Jimmy Uri wrote: "Jim,
Science is a flexible matter. Based on my past experience in electrical engineering, we classified science in two groups.
Exact science, based on laws of physics, math, etc. If an airplane wen..."


Look at this NASA graph. This is the type of thing Mr. Trump is trying to suppress. We have reached 400 parts per million carbon in the atmosphere. When we reach 450 ppm, it will be a point of almost desperation. We may not be able to change it at that time. And 500 ppm is a dead planet. Those are facts, Uri. Carbon can be measured pretty accurately. Eliminate the EPA and regulations to make some money now is a dead end view.

Jimmy

http://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resou...


message 20: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments Cool that we have both bitter opponents and fervent supporters of this and previous administrations plus observants from other countries. Nothing else is required for a civilized debate


message 21: by Graeme (new)

Graeme Rodaughan | 7000 comments Hi Nik,

I would respectfully suggest that a willingness to listen in full and explore the other person's position is a necessary element of a civilized debate.

May I also add that a nice glass of wine can also assist with a general air of civility...


message 22: by Michael (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Uri wrote: "Amazingly, every person who got involved with this string is not a US Sitizen, except may be for Jim. You do not have skin in the game. That is exactly we have voted for---America for Americans first."

Yep. Its amazing how many foreigners have an opinion on American politics and policy. And its usually one where they are asking for the US to shoulder more international burden.

But its been like that for the past 100 years since the start of WW1.

I think the world in general is deathly afraid of the US becoming nationalistic and isolationist. The last time we did the world ended up in WW2 and tens of millions were killed.


message 23: by Alex (new)

Alex (asato) Graeme Rodaughan wrote: "WRT the constitution you could start with the ACLU at

[1] https://www.aclu.org/feature/indefini...

and

[2..."


however, the ACLU doesn't believe that this NDAA could result in domestic arrests:
"The ACLU does not believe that the NDAA authorizes military detention of American citizens or anyone else in the United States. Any president’s claim of domestic military detention authority under the NDAA would be unconstitutional and illegal. Nevertheless, there is substantial public debate around whether the NDAA could be read even to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act and authorize indefinite military detention without charge or trial within the United States."
(the following paragraph from the aforementioned ACLU link)



message 24: by Graeme (new)

Graeme Rodaughan | 7000 comments They "do not believe."

Nevertheless, there is substantial public debate around whether the NDAA could be read even to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act and authorize indefinite military detention without charge or trial within the United States.

It's open to interpretation.

One of the key issues will be how it is interpreted, especially if the Supreme Court is compliant with the interpretation.


message 25: by Michel (last edited Feb 05, 2017 01:35AM) (new)

Michel Poulin Michael wrote: "Yep. Its amazing how many foreigners have an opinion on American politics and policy. And its usually one where they are asking for the US to shoulder more international burden. But its been like that for the past 100 years since the start of WW1. I think the world in general is deathly afraid of the US becoming nationalistic and isolationist. The last time we did the world ended up in WW2 and tens of millions were killed.
..."


Michael, we non-Americans have opinions on this because it has possible international implications and because some of our citizens are also affected by this travel ban. As for being afraid that the USA becomes isolationist, actually I wouldn't mind it. There has been way too many past instances of American meddling in the affairs of other countries. Remember your support to dictators in Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Chile, Argentina, your CIA-supported coups around Central and South America and Iran (the coup against PM Mossadegh that put the Shah in power)? Right now, Trump's ham-fisted handling of the present situation is only creating ill-will and more hostility towards the USA, instead of making it safer. Wake up and cut the arrogance, please!


message 26: by J.J. (new)

J.J. Mainor | 2091 comments Nik wrote: "Mehreen wrote: "Who did Obama wage a war against?"

I think Obama will be remembered as one of the least trigger happy presidents and his term is characterized by very reserve military involvement ..."


Not exactly true...he was very reluctant to use troops, but he ramped up drone usage to target top terrorist targets, and he did utilize our special forces (Navy Seals for example) for targeted, surgical strikes.

As already mentioned, he got the US involved in the Libya revolution, and it was the lack of stability in the aftermath that likely contributed to holding back on helping in Syria.


message 27: by J.J. (new)

J.J. Mainor | 2091 comments Philip wrote: "Uri wrote: "Mehreen,Michael and Philip, all have valid and factual input. However, their view reflects of a forigner looking from the outside in.
If you believe the cnns of the world and the alphab..."


There was a case that went to the Supreme Court a few years ago where it was ruled Obama's pics to the National Labor Board were unconstitutional. The Constitution requires many Presidential appointments to go to the Congress for approval, but there is a clause that allows the President to make emergency appointments "during the recess of the Senate." Presidents for ages have pushed the envelope on what the clause means by waiting for Congress to go on recess and making their appointments so they can get them installed without approval.

Obama took it a step further and tried to make appointments when Congress has a few days off. Congress wasn't in recess, but he tried to argue because they weren't actually working, it was a technical recess. Supreme Court cut through the BS and ruled in a unanimous decision that he can't define what the "recess" is...Congress decides when they're on recess and that the clause only applies when it says it applies.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/...

One more recently and a little more high profile involved his attempt to delay deportation of certain illegal immigrants. A 4-4 tie in the Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings that his executive action ordering the deferment of certain illegals circumvented Congressional authority. While the President has leeway in how it enforces Congressional law, one court ruled "the program, it said, also exceeded Mr. Obama’s statutory authority."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us...

I'm certainly not going to argue Obama didn't have the right to issue executive orders, and it's foolish to think these are the first Presidents determined to have overstepped their Constitutional authority, but arguably, Obama's concerted efforts to bypass the Republican controlled Congress could be seen as contempt for the Constitutional separation of powers. I know, I know, the Republicans refused to work with him, but our government is set up the way it is so one person can't have too much power. If Congress wouldn't work with him (and he certainly isn't the first President Congress refused to work with...Tyler anyone?), then it is something he has to deal with. I'm sure the Democrats will pick and choose their battles in Congress a lot better than the Republicans have in the past 6 years, but it's almost certain we'll see some issues or Presidential nominees they will obstruct and refuse to work with Trump on. I'm sure he'll try to issue executive actions to circumvent Congress as Obama did, and I would expect the Supreme Court to block it when it does cross the line. We'll see how the Supreme Court comes down on his immigration ban, and if they agree with the current rulings, then he will have to live with it.


message 28: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2792 comments J.J. wrote: "Philip wrote: "Uri wrote: "Mehreen,Michael and Philip, all have valid and factual input. However, their view reflects of a forigner looking from the outside in.
If you believe the cnns of the world..."


Good points J.J. Given the refusal by Congress to even meet an Obama nominee for Supreme Court (plenty of formal recesses in that time period) how do you think the democrats will react in the Senate to the new appointment, or will they pick other battles.


message 29: by M.L. (new)

M.L. Obama's legacy is peace, prosperity, inclusiveness, accountability, responsibility.


message 30: by Michael (last edited Feb 05, 2017 09:34AM) (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Michel wrote: "Michael, we non-Americans have opinions on this because it has possible international implications and because some of our citizens are also affected by this travel ban. As for being afraid that the USA becomes isolationist, actually I wouldn't mind it. There has been way too many past instances of American meddling in the affairs of other countries. Remember your support to dictators in Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Chile, Argentina, your CIA-supported coups around Central and South America and Iran (the coup against PM Mossadegh that put the Shah in power)? Right now, Trump's ham-fisted handling of the present situation is only creating ill-will and more hostility towards the USA, instead of making it safer. Wake up and cut the arrogance, please! "

C'mon, Canada has some of the most restrictive border policies of any nation.

A good friend needed to go to Montreal for business. He has a felony conviction from 20 years ago for drugs. He's also an honorably discharged US military member with a college degree and a clean record since. Ive traveled to other countries in Europe with him. He's traveled to Russia... the only country he is banned from entering ----> Canada

So please, no crocodile tears how a dual Syrian/Canada citizen cannot come to the US, when a retired military US citizen, is banned from entering Canada for something that happened 20 yrs ago.

Nothing would make most Americans happier than to turn off the spigot of money for international assistance and military assistance provided to foreign countries to the tune of $50 billion a year.

I agree, we should stop meddling in other country's affairs. The CIA should have never been formed and its destruction is long over due. Truman created it and he even said it was the biggest mistake of his Presidency.

Its time for the rest of the world to fend for itself. No immigrants, no refugees and no meddling.

Let the Russians have Crimea and Georgia and whatever other country they want to invade of the old Eastern Bloc. Pull our financial support out of NATO. Let ISIS and the other Muslims fight it out among each other and then deal with the winner. Pull all aide to Israel and see what happens. Will the Muslims attack again or can they stand on their own ?

What do you think the world would like then ? lol


message 31: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments M.L. Roberts wrote: "Obama's legacy is peace, prosperity, inclusiveness, accountability, responsibility."

A little rosy, I would say, but a legit opinion -:)


message 32: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments Michael wrote: "Let the Russians have Crimea and Georgia and whatever other country they want to invade of the old Eastern Bloc. Pull our financial support out of NATO. Let ISIS and the other Muslims fight it out among each other and then deal with the winner. Pull all aide to Israel and see what happens. Will the Muslims attack again or can they stand on their own ?

What do you think the world would like then ? lol .."


Some would say it's not a hypothetical description, but what in fact happened under the previous administration -:)


message 33: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments BTW, I'm not sure it's like everybody's begging protection and money from the US. Ukraine is begging -:), but nobody gives it arms even, despite Budapest memorandum, where some reputable countries vouched to guarantee its integrity. Might and money are the means to establish hegemony.
The way things look now: the moment US financial and military presence stops, either Russia or China are there with their money and military...


message 34: by Michael (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Nik wrote: "Some would say it's not a hypothetical description, but what in fact happened under the previous administration -:) "

Obama was a horrible President on foreign policy and Kerry and Clinton werent any better as heads of the State Department.

I dont expect Trump to be any better. But at least with Trump he's already told the world what to expect. With Obama he tried to make the world believe he was good in foreign diplomacy.

Nik wrote:"The way things look now: the moment US financial and military presence stops, either Russia or China are there with their money and military..."

Exactly. China and Russia will fill the void. So if our allies want to complain, let them complain in Russian and Chinese.

I doubt that will happen.


message 35: by Mike (new)

Mike | 181 comments Uri wrote: "Amazingly, every person who got involved with this string is not a US Sitizen, except may be for Jim. You do not have skin in the game. That is exactly we have voted for---America for Americans first."

As an American, I have no problem with people from other countries giving their opinions. It's their right to do so. In fact, I think it's often helpful to hear what people think at a remove. Our country in general could probably stand to take others' opinions into account more often-- unless you want to make a virtue of ignorance.

Nik wrote: "Mehreen wrote: "Who did Obama wage a war against?"

I think Obama will be remembered as one of the least trigger happy presidents and his term is characterized by very reserve military involvement ..."


I tend to agree, with the few exceptions that other posters have mentioned- whether that's a good or bad thing I think has to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but Obama personified most Americans' reactions to the Bush administration's foreign misadventures. Without the horrific blunder of Iraq as a recent caveat, for example, I'd say it's possible we would have gotten involved with troops on the ground in Syria.

Obama has always struck me as very rational and measured, but it can be argued that he is sometimes too measured, too willing to give his opponents the benefit of the doubt. In the case of Ukraine, the Budapest Memorandum clearly states that the US and Britain (as well as Russia) guarantee the country's territorial integrity, doesn't it? Kind of questionable for the US to sit back and not even supply Ukraine with weapons.


message 36: by Philip (last edited Feb 05, 2017 03:02PM) (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2792 comments Mike wrote: "Uri wrote: "Amazingly, every person who got involved with this string is not a US Sitizen, except may be for Jim. You do not have skin in the game. That is exactly we have voted for---America for A..."

Russia would claim that it's Ukrainian separatists not them.

Unfortunately we as Europeans do have skin in the game. It's a formalised Treaty been in existence since 1949, called NATO. An attack on one is an attack against all. Article 5 is the collective defence and it's only been used once in NATO's history. From NATO web site http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/top...

An act of solidarity

On the evening of 12 September 2001, less than 24 hours after the attacks, and for the first time in NATO's history, the Allies invoked the principle of Article 5. Then NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson subsequently informed the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the Alliance's decision.

The North Atlantic Council – NATO’s principal political decision-making body – agreed that if it determined that the attack was directed from abroad against the United States, it would be regarded as an action covered by Article 5. On 2 October, once the Council had been briefed on the results of investigations into the 9/11 attacks, it determined that they were regarded as an action covered by Article 5.

By invoking Article 5, NATO members showed their solidarity toward the United States ....

What followed was immediate support for US air defences in the form of NATO AWACs aircraft, not just US, helping patrol US skies and more significantly, the attack on Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and Al Qaeda. A war that got confused with the non-NATO Iraq 2 and the broadening of the Al Qaeda activities. The culmination for Obama of that was the killing of Bin Laden in Pakistan. A country funnily enough not on Trump's list. Nor Saudi Arabia where all the 9/11 attackers came from. Casualties in Afghanistan came from forces around the world. Just as they did in Iraq. The biggest group of casualties are Afghans themselves.

Of course Obama failed in countering terror groups just as Bushes did and Clinton - there are very few counter terrorist operations that succeed. Sri Lanka might have against the Tamils but at what cost.

Since then, and before, terrorism has criss-crossed the world, Bali, Madrid, Mumbai, London, Tunisia, Paris, Boston.

Boston bombers had Chechen background one of Putin's internal forays, still he's America's friend now. Terrorism in Russia too with attacks on cinemas.
"All 40 of the attackers there were killed, with no casualties among Spetsnaz; about 130 hostages died, including nine foreigners, due to adverse reactions to the gas."

i.e. Putin deployed chemical weapons inside Russia. Still he got the terrorists.

Chechnya is still not safe. Who knows what is happening in Crimea or the impact on Russians of IS when they turn their attention there. Russia's own efforts in Afghanistan ended in disaster.

Trump may be much more effective than Obama, but annoying allies and friends from the Pacific (Trade) to southern border, (Mexico), to Europe does not seem the best way to go. Perhaps the US can survive without us. Isolationism might work and then again it just might make the world an even more dangerous place than it already is. Perhaps America's friends won't respond next time. Perhaps the leases for bases the US wants to use or the sea lanes it wants access to won't be open. Of course Trade is one of the root causes of the Pacific part of World War II. If US industry is to thrive under the new regime, who will it export to.


message 37: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin A good, thorough analysis, Philip. Bravo!


message 38: by Uri (new)

Uri Norwich | 33 comments I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---for his support of our country protected by our Constitution.


message 39: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin Uri wrote: "I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---for his suppor..."

Goodreads' membership is international to my best knowledge and this is an OPEN discussion thread, Uri. Enough said!


message 40: by Matthew (last edited Feb 06, 2017 07:45PM) (new)

Matthew Williams (houseofwilliams) Michel wrote: "Uri wrote: "I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---fo..."

Oh but Michel, you're not allowed to take issue with things American agencies do. Otherwise, you're "ungrateful" and can expect the US to pull all aid and assistance worldwide (apparently). Never mind that that their national debt is the largest in the world, that their deficit is the largest in the world, and that their trade gap is the largest in the world.

Never mind that their economy is so heavily dependent on imports, foreign labor and investment, or that if they were any other country in the world, with all the money they owe and their massive trade deficit, they would be forced to devalue their currency and service their exports to prevent economic collapse. No, we need them more than they need the rest of us, right?


message 41: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments Jimmy and Mike, please, check your citizenship, lest revoked -:)


message 42: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments Mike wrote: "In the case of Ukraine, the Budapest Memorandum clearly states that the US and Britain (as well as Russia) guarantee the country's territorial integrity, doesn't it? Kind of questionable for the US to sit back and not even supply Ukraine with weapons. ."

Exactly, taking into account that Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal for these assurances at the time 3-d biggest in the world...


message 43: by Alex (new)

Alex (asato) Uri wrote: "I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---for his suppor..."

this kind of trolling post should not be rewarded with a response. it’s bereft of value and only meant to inflame.


message 44: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2792 comments Uri wrote: "I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---for his suppor..."

Uri - I am as far from anti- American as you are likely to find. I had the honour to serve with the USMC whilst living there and it was an honour. We have frequently returned to see friends, despite an ever more aggressive and rude immigration service, and are in almost daily contact with friends there spread across the nation. At one point we were going to emigrate to the USA.

I comment as a friend who does want to see a strong US but I want one engaged with its allies and supports them, not insults and denigrates them. As the embodiment, fulfilling his ceremonial role, as the President, the role is the USA to outside eyes. What he does and says is the USA to the rest of the world. As in all things in life think before you speak. We criticise as friends because good friends tell you like it is not how you might want it to be. And yes we poke fun, but I do that with my own useless group of politicians far more than I do the USA
Why not start a topic on all that is wrong with European leaders you disagree with.

We are exceptionally lucky in this age to have the Internet and such systems as GR to allow such conversations otherwise we would never learn of some of the issues history and points of view put forward, especially by contributors from other nations.

If you only want one set of opinions talk to a mirror.


message 45: by Michael (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Uri wrote: "I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---for his support..."

You're welcome.

Foreigners do not understand what it is to be an American no more than we understand what it is to be a foreigner.

Everyone has an opinion on America, its one of the few countries that will illicit a wide range of emotions. America has the muscle to make the world love us, fear us, align with us or want to destroy us. No other country comes in 2nd. We are now the world's only superpower. China is growing but they arent there yet.

And of course when the US has a President that says America first, its going to cause the rest of the world to get a little uneasy.

Until you have spent a considerable amount of time living the US, its impossible to understand. No different than a US citizen living in another country.

For example, Ive spent a considerable amount of time in Italy. Even though I was raised an Italian-American in NJ, that's were the similarities end.

Italy is still a socialist/fascist country and will be for the foreseeable future. And to a certain extent, the Italians I have encountered from all over Italy, are good decent people but they are not like Americans. No more than Canadians, Australians, Brits or the French are like Americans.

Italians do not act quickly, they wait for the government to figure out solutions to problems and for the most part of a peaceful non-violent people.

They showed me a newly opened road to the town. It took 30 years to build that road because of the bureaucracy.

I tried to take my interpreter from Milan to Naples for conduct some research. He was actually afraid to spend several days in Naples due to the perceived violence - 3 people were shot in a weekend.

And then I showed him the statistics from Chicago were 58 were shot in one weekend. Naples is as safe as it comes.

When I proposed an idea to increase tourism to the former mayor of the town where my family is from I received a stern warning about how I would be stopped by the Camorra, Naples' organized crime syndicate. When I told them I was friends with and represented someone in the American mafia they were aghast. They could not understand how someone could work with and be friends with such an individual.

Ive come to learn that in Italy, I must think like an Italian but act like an American to get anything done.

Being an American is vastly differently than a foreigner having an opinion on America.


message 46: by Matthew (last edited Feb 07, 2017 07:53PM) (new)

Matthew Williams (houseofwilliams) Michael wrote: "Uri wrote: "I woukd like to put my final word in this discussion and simply let foreigners to "fight" our American issues. I would like to thank the only American--Michael(attorney from NJ/LA)---fo..."

And what about Americans who have the exact same opinions, Michael? To brush off what foreigners say because they are not Americans smacks of arrogance of chauvinism on its own. But worse, it fails to acknowledge the fact that the strongest critics of American policy (and American culture) have always been American.

When roughly half the citizenry says they don't like something, and the rest of the world overwhelmingly agrees with them, you might want to consider that they have a point - and not indulge in notions of exceptionalism or false notions of "difference". Being American does not make you special or better than anyone, or your opinions on your country more valued.


message 47: by Jimmy (new)

Jimmy Listen, Uri, I too am tired of the Hate-America-First Crowd, whether they be foreign or domestic. Right now, I'm worried about the biggest American Government Hater of them all: the Republican party. They thrive on hating government, running on that issue, and then making sure they fuck government up as much as they can when they get elected so they can keep running on that issue. It has become an anti-science, anti-government party.

To the best of my ability, I can only spot three potential cabinet members of Trump that are qualified for their posts. And he calls them "the highest IQs of any cabinet in history." How does he get away with such comments? Don't his supporters see how crazy that is? He is an absolute disaster for this country. The Republican Party created him by their continual focusing on hatred of government.


message 48: by Alex (last edited Feb 07, 2017 12:02PM) (new)

Alex (asato) Just want to caution about flame wars. This is one goal of trolling.

Anyone is entitled to their opinion. The great thing about the internet is that we can just leave the conversation much more easily than we can with our neighbors and coworkers.


message 49: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12897 comments Ok, guys, just to remind - no cursing. I personally don't mind, but we have a few minors on the group, pls show them some good example and they will reciprocate -:)

The concern and comments of our American friends from both camps are noted and respected. I'm sure foreigners may not understand certain things that locals feel, know or experience and it's very important to have an input from within.
I think overall we have an American friendly ambiance and many American friends are among the first who joined this group and remain active and participating.
Everything's open for discussion, criticism and praise, be it Putin, Obama, Trump, Trudeau, Nieto, Martians, countries, continents, penguins and giraffes or whoever.
Superpowers are characterized by their influence on a global scale and it makes them everyone's concern, just like some ballistic missile launch in another part of the globe or bad guys elsewhere interest superpowers.
Having a very geographically and culturally diverse community here, I think is a great advantage for we can share our experiences, learn others and enrich our understanding of global and local situ and maybe where things can be improved.
Unfortunately, there is no ideal country on the planet at the moment and this blue & green ball may be not in the best shape in general. Some places are better off, others much worse. Knowing of something different seems important...


message 50: by Roger (new)

Roger Jackson I'm a little late to the party, but Uri sounds like an extremist.

I am a white, Anglo-Saxon male Christian American citizen. I just want to make that clear. Uri, I'm sorry, I think you're full of it.

Under a republican administration, the American economy all but crashed due to little regulation over the housing and banking industries. The American economy has slowly but steadily recovered over the last eight years. The EPA had nothing to do with the economy bottoming out, nor did it have anything to do with the recovery, or the speed thereof.

The EPA has helped keep our water and air halfway clean. Look at other countries that pay no attention to the environment (China anyone?) I read an article earlier today that stated the Chinese government is mandating a 30% decrease in coal burning because the air quality is so bad. I for one do not want to be forced to walk outside with a filter over my nose and mouth. The Chinese are very smart people, but they waited too long to deal with a serious problem. I don't want that here.


« previous 1
back to top