Donald John Trump

I was unaware that the Chinese and Indians thought like this? I was also unaware that Christians thought like this, given that they are the world's largest religion(31% of the world's population).

Well, you do learn something new every day!

Time to stick it to the Chinese, Indians, and Christians! Let's go Pops, lead the charge!

 

Funny, that...Considering that your God, Trump, is already in their thrall. Trump is in debt to Chinese banks to a minimum of 650 million USD. Trump talked tough on China on the campaign trail, but once elected, he backed off pretty quick. Wonder if the Chinese threatened to call in their marker.

 

There is also the speed with which the CVhinese have issued trademarks to a whole range of Trump brands http://time.com/4697701/china-trump-trademarks-approval/

They like Trump. he is a man they can work with or pay off.

 

More to the point - lack of speed when he was not President...10 years or so they lingered in court, but once he took office, the Red(pun intended) Tape simply disappeared.

 

I was really avoiding being pulled into this train wreck of a thread. China, look wider than the petty left/right bickering at the moment, and look at a more likely reason. Trump has shown he does listen to Mattis, (others have mentioned he is open to listening). North Korea has become a huge issue as the public has focused elsewhere. South Korea was one of Mattis' earliest visits which means he is aware it's a flashpoint. Japan is scared. Kim Jong-il's son Kim Jong-un is now in charge and he's bat shit crazy. Don't piss off the Chinese and Koreans at the same time, we need them to keep on China's good side in order to have them put pressure on them. A good time to pull back on the rhetoric, and it is more likely the world situation than any type of "pay off", "favors" is the reason.

 

China’s Economy Continues to Decline
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang told the National People’s Congress that China’s GDP growth rate would drop from 7 percent in 2016 to 6.5 percent this year. In 2016, the country’s growth rate was the lowest it had been since 1990. The precision with which any country’s economic growth is measured is dubious, since it is challenging to measure the economic activity of hundreds of millions of people and businesses. But the reliability of China’s economic numbers has always been taken with a larger grain of salt than in most countries. We suspect the truth is that China’s economy is growing less than 6.5 percent, if at all.
[...]
China’s economic miracle, like that of Japan before it, is over. Its resurrection simply isn’t working, which shouldn’t surprise anyone. Sustained double-digit economic growth is possible when you begin with a wrecked economy. In Japan’s case, the country was recovering from World War II. China was recovering from Mao Zedong’s policies. Simply by getting back to work an economy will surge. If the damage from which the economy is recovering is great enough, that surge can last a generation.
[...]
The U.S. is China’s greatest threat. President Donald Trump is threatening the one thing that China cannot withstand: limits on China’s economic links to the United States. In addition, China must have access to the Pacific and Indian oceans for its exports. That means controlling the South and East China seas. As we have previously written, the U.S. is aggressively resisting that control.
[...]
But reality is reality. China no longer is the top owner of U.S. government debt, an honor that goes to Japan. China’s rainy day fund is being used up, and that reveals its deepest truth: When countries have money they must keep safe, they bank in the U.S.

China carried out a great – and impressive – surge. But now it is just another country struggling to figure out what its economy needs and what its politics permit.

 

A nice saying but factually incorrect.
Hitler gained his dictatorial powers in one day, on 23 March 1933, thanks to the so called Enabling Act. There was no graduation, they didn't come first for the Xs and then for the Ys. It all happened in one day.

But even if the first were the communists, not socialists.

After the Enabling Act any protest, any speaking out wasn't possible - and the entire left-wing opposition was eliminated in a month: the Communists, the Socialists, and the Trade Unions.

Even more the saying would suggest the Socialists, the Trade Unionists, the Jews were major political forces in Germany. But they weren't, the absolute majority in the German parliament was held by right wing and centrist parties.

 

Pastor Martin Niemöller's poem has been through several differently worded translations, and this is but one, from the US Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Wikipedia discusses the various versions here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

 

Actually, the top owner of US Government Debt is the US public. Total US Government Debt is just shy of $20 Trillion, with slightly over $6 Trillion of that being held by foreign sources.

There is also speculation that if the Foreign states that make up the EU were lumped together, they would also surpass China's holdings.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...-biggest-us-treasury-holder-and-not-good-sign

 

That and Trump found out that how empty his threat concerning Taiwan really was. In the first round of hardball, the Chinese are up one - nothing.

 

In a era where the previous administrations 'pivot' never occurred and the Ozzies are trying to figure out how to make Mandarin their primary language, China needed a shot across their bow. Not sure this was the right one, but one was needed. I agree North Korea is a bigger short term problem, but often is whenever Kim il Doofus thinks he is being ignored. The recent execution/assassination clearly demonstrates he is more worried about internal threats than he is external. China has not been terribly helpful in the past and frankly doubt they will be in the future unless the perceive their interests are at stake. Not sure if they are even aware their great boom is in decline yet. North Korea has played the same saber rattling game now for more than a generation, which usually get ratcheted up whenever we have a joint exercise in the region or when a new President gets elected.

 

....And if Kim il Doofus perceives the internal threat is great enough, he might just do more than rattle his sabre. The big question is does he have the capabilities to carry out his threat? I'd think if he does, within a limited radius, his most likely target would be the Tokyo-Yokohama metropolitan area, close to 38 million people. The most bang for his buck. China wouldn't be likely to intervene because Japan is a big territorial and economic competitor. They will make statements of condemnation but are unlikely to do anything more. Japan lacks the ability to respond in kind and while she has in recent years increased the capabilities of her defense forces, they are (by-law) not capable of unilateral, extra-territorial interventions. Would we throw nukes in return? Unlikely, unless we are directly attacked, especially if he's capable of counter-striking with nukes of his own. This could be why he's promoting the specter, through tests, of potential capabilities to hit Hawaii or the US West Coast. We would respond in a massive way with conventional air and cruise missiles. We'd send troops to bolster an attack against South Korea, but I doubt we'd invade the North. I deployed there years ago for a couple of "Team Spirit" exercises and it's tough terrain to fight in. If we did invade the North it would have to be very limited because, just like in the 1950 Korean War, China wouldn't like us on their Manchurian border. Once, we (US/South Korea) had bloodied ourselves well and severely weakened North Korea, China might even invade the North on the pretext of establishing a buffer zone. They'd deploy their Navy and Air Forces in a series of brinkmanship confrontations with our naval and air forces to warn us not to push too hard. When we pull back, their military prestige within the region would increase and give more weight to the expanding territorial demands they've made in recent years. When Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei and Indonesia perceive that the US is no longer capable of, or is unwilling to counter China, then her position with regards to current maritime and territorial claims would be significantly strengthened.
Our actual best bet, to maintain the status quo in the region, is to leverage our significant economic ties with China to contain North Korea.

It should be noted that North Korea claimed it's 09 September, 2016 nuclear test was of a warhead capable of being mounted on a ballistic missile. Germany's BGR estimated the yield at 25kt. which would mean that North Korea had probably developed a fusion (thermonuclear) device. Recent reports that North Korea may have sold lithium-6, a key material for production of miniaturized nuclear weapons. Lithium-6 can be used to produce Tritium lending additional weight to North Korea's claim it has developed warheads capable of being delivered by ballistic missile.

 

Trump is an authoritarian Nationalist that incorporates aspects of the right and of the left, big government and small government, into his policy spectrum, to whatever suits his political needs at that time. He reminds me of a Fascist.

 

The American Civil Liberties Union staged a nationwide training event Saturday to make sure people are aware of their rights as protesters and urge organized, public resistance by those opposed to policies of President Donald Trump.
[...]
The event, staged in town hall style, was aimed at capitalizing on numerous demonstrations since Trump’s election in November and to make sure people know their rights to protest, Romero said. He said priority issues are immigration, the First Amendment free speech and religious freedom rights, civil and reproductive rights and rights of gay, lesbian and transgender people.
[...]
Another plan is creation of “freedom cities” around the country that would encourage local officials to pass laws resisting Trump policies such as stepped-up deportations of people living in the country illegally, said Faiz Shakir, ACLU national political director.

The "resist Trump" video:

 

He definitely uses fear as a political weapon. Also economic nationalism and nationalism in general. Steve Bannon is an admirer of Lenin and at CPAC last month bragged about wanting to bring down the administrative status quo state. That sounds like a terrorist to me.

 

Steve Bannon explains, in his own words, what awaits us in the future:

 

Afghan Ambassador to the United States, Dr. Hamdullah Mohib on the differences between Trump and Obama
I've personally met with President Trump at Mar-a-Lago and the president has had two phone conversations with President Ghani [The president of Afghanistan]. One call was after he won the election and one after [Trump] became president. Before the calls, we were advised to keep conversations short because, we were told, Trump will not be interested in the details of the call and does not have a long attention span, so it would be pointless to have a long call.

However, we were pleasantly surprised at how much time President Trump spent asking very informed questions. The first time the presidents spoke, the questions Trump asked impressed us. “How can you win in this fight [against terrorism]?” he asked. “What do you need to become financially independent?” and “How can American business invest in Afghanistan? How can we develop businesses and mining in your country?”

Trump would listen intently after each question, often asking follow-ups. Trump's second call with our president was even longer than the first. Asking these types of questions for our country is something the Obama administration never did. The Obama administration was the most academic administration we have ever had to deal with but the Trump administration has been the most thoughtful and intelligent.

Trump continually asked “How can you win? What does Afghanistan need to win?” in reference to our fight with terrorism. Trump wants to win. Sincerely. All the Obama administration wanted to do was not lose.

The Obama administration was hesitant with us. The enemy could sense that. When the Obama administration announced its plans to pull troops out of the region, they announced the exact date they would do it. All our enemies had to do was wait [Obama] out. They knew the date they had to hang on until — which gave them the will to fight. They used that time to recruit and build up resources.

To bring real reform, we must be able to defeat enemies outside our country and inside. We must overthrow the Afghan warlords who are profiteering off the war. Every time we tried to remove one of them from power, [Secretary John] Kerry would say "no" because it would potentially make it unstable and require more troops be brought in. The entire Obama administration was too cautious, but Kerry was the most cautious. Perhaps the Obama administration was fatigued by the time we assumed power. [President Ghani assumed power in September of 2014.] But Trump is very different from Obama in this way.

This is good, for the future of Afghanistan.

 

I don't remember a post by GunSlinger that I have been more in agreement with. The only quibble I have would be to replace "Nationalist" with "conman".

 

Europe's Lesson Teaches Us: Don't Go Green
If you listen to the media narrative on climate change and "clean energy," you'd think that the rest of the world has moved smartly and seamlessly toward 21st century green energy while the U.S. is the high-polluting laggard that just won't get with the program to save the planet.
Think again. The green energy revolution around the world has turned into a big green meltdown, with many nations sprinting away from "renewable" energy with the speed of Usain Bolt.

Here are a few of the latest news flashes from Europe and Asia. In Germany, the world leader in green energy, electricity prices have now reached a level triple those paid in the United States. Imagine the anger here if middle-class Americans saw a tripling of their utility bills each month.

In Britain, to comply with renewable energy requirements, power stations are burning hundreds of millions of pounds of wood pellets (pellets imported from the U.S.). Environmental experts confirm that burning wood is much worse for the environment than burning natural gas or even coal.

Australia, another "green energy" leader, saw its electricity prices skyrocket this past winter. According to an analysis by the Institute for Energy Research, power costs surged unbelievably -- from $100 per megawatt hour to $10,000 per megawatt hour. This was because of heavy dependence on an unreliable renewable energy program.

Sweden announced a decade ago that it was all-in on green energy, and the government launched a wind-power program. Embarrassingly, Swedish politicians now have had to acknowledge the program has become so expensive and inefficient that the government will phase out the subsidies lavished on the industry.
[...]
Thankfully, Donald Trump has made it known that adopting more of the policy quackery of Europe -- at a time when the U.S. has more recoverable shale oil and gas and more clean coal than any other nation on the planet -- is no way to make America great again. Europe is running away from the fantasy of green energy, and this is one rare instance when America may want to follow their lead.

 

You act like this has not been said before...
From 2014: https://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/eper_13.pdf
From 2016 - Problems with intermittent renewables is discussed in this article: https://ourfiniteworld.com/2016/08/...es-cant-favorably-transform-grid-electricity/

Intermittent renewables have never been able to meet base load requirements, and without substantial R&D, and substantial growth in production likely never will.

However, similar "pie in the sky" claims were made about nuclear power when it was in it's infancy. Further, nuclear power was not profitable for some years after it's introduction to the grid, until the technologies had matured.

So, while it is easy to harp on the early costs of "going green", it does not necessarily imply that it will remain so in the future