Have you ever had someone tell you that
something is impossible? Well, sometimes you run across someone that
is willing, and able, to prove you wrong. A few weeks ago I went to
see the movie Hidden Figures. It was nominated for Best Picture and
I can see why. It is the amazing story of three African-American
women of immense talent and perseverance who worked behind the scenes
at NASA to help launch the United States into space. This despite
all of the obstacles put in their path.
As we watch the implosion of countries in the Middle East and we are told that it is impossible for
people in these countries to work together, maybe we should take a
break from that supposed reality and watch what some people have
accomplished by their hard work and determination within a system that wasn't favorable to them.
83 comments:
I been hearing talk of a possible ‘Best Picture’ nomination for this one.
I've been reading that the terrorist truck driver behind the Stockholm attacks the other day had been ordered deported back in February, but the police hadn't gotten around to picking him up yet.
That's liable to raise some questions among the Swedes.
I think I read somewhere that he had given the authorities a fake address, so they were unable to find him when they went there.
And, just as an update… All the intelligence seems to be coalescing around the view that it was indeed Assad who decided to go with a poison gas attack against Khan Sheikhoun. After I spent time telling Marcus that he was jumping the gun by assuming that it was Assad behind it, it would appear that his assumption is being borne out by subsequent investigations.
So, do you really think that the Trump administration is coming around to believe that regime change is the best thing in Syria? If so I would like to be a fly on the wall in that meeting Tillerson will have in Moscow.
All the intelligence seems to be coalescing around the view that it was indeed Assad who decided to go with a poison gas attack against Khan Sheikhoun.
Hmmm...perhaps it is best to let that slide. But, if this is the case, it just makes more of a case for removal of Assad and leaves the Russian support of him questionable.
"So, do you really think that the Trump administration is coming
around to believe that regime change is the best thing in Syria?"
I think Rex Tillerson's getting there. I don't know that Tillerson's opinion means much.
"…and leaves the Russian support of him questionable."
They're still working on the question of whether the Russians tried to cover it up for him, destory evidence. (Russian drone flew over the hospital where the victims were taken, then the hospital got bombed--they think by a Russian plane.)
There's some reason to think that the Trump administration's recent very public disputes with Putin's Russia could be a cover for bad news for Trump coming out of the domestic investigations into possible collusion with the Kremlin during the last election. CNN
There's some reason to think that the Trump administration's recent very public disputes with Putin's Russia could be a cover for bad news for Trump coming out of the domestic investigations into possible collusion with the Kremlin during the last election.
After a review of the same intelligence reports brought to light by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides have so far found no evidence that Obama administration officials did anything unusual or illegal, multiple sources in both parties tell CNN.
It is possible that the Trump administrations actions have all been red herrings designed to divert attention. If that is the case then the administration's foreign policy is even worse than what Zeyad accused me with regard to my thoughts on the subject. There has been speculation that Ivanka Trump was part of the decision to bomb the airfield in Syria. Somehow that is just as scary. While I approved of that action, the idea that the decision was not made as a part of a well thought out strategy, rather than an emotional impulse, does not inspire confidence.
It appears that Trump is on track to outspend Obama. I think Trump will end up being a very expensive president, in more ways than one.
"There has been speculation that Ivanka Trump was part of the
decision to bomb the airfield in Syria. Somehow that is just as scary."
I think the story there goes beyond speculation into the realm of rumor. To quibble possibly overmuch about definitions.
"It appears that Trump is on track to outspend Obama."
Yes, I have been amused by Radio-Right-Wing being so extraordinarily quiet on a subject that animated them so much just a year ago.
By the way, in what has been called ‘the most Republican district’ in the country, a Kansas district where Trump won by 27% just this last election, the Republican candidate for Congress won in a special election won by only 7% even after Trump made a special plea on his behalf. Politico.com
May not mean much, but it seems to clearly indicate that Trump's losing ground with those who're not dedicated Trumpkins.
And, just by the way…
My own private reading of D.C. politics leads me to believe that Trump's in really serious trouble on his budget agenda.
The Republicans seem to think they can count on passing a stop-gap budget resolution of some sort with Democratic help by simply defying Trump's wishes on the matter, but I'm not sure they can even get a Democratic-leaning budget resolution brought to the floor in the first place. They may suddenly find out they're even less capable of governing than they, or the political press, thought.
They may very well manage to close down the government all by themselves, whilst they hold the House, the Senate, and now the White House. I know this sounds preposterous, but I think it very well may be true.
We have ‘til the end of the month to find out if it happens to be true, but I'm beginning to believe in it being a real possibility, if not the most probable outcome (fact that it's getting virtually no press so far notwithstanding).
"And, just as an update… All the intelligence seems to be coalescing around the view that it was indeed Assad who decided to go with a poison gas attack against Khan Sheikhoun.
[...]
They're still working on the question of whether the Russians tried to cover it up for him, destory evidence."
Yeah. And Saddam ripped Kuwaiti babies out of incubators in 1991 and he was in cahoots with Al Qaida before 9/11 and then he had mobile chemical weapons labs and bought yellowcake uranium from Africa. Powell told us as much at the UN and he had "proof" with him that both you Lee and Lynnette would've said were rock solid.
Also Libya would be a north African model of progress as soon as Khadaffi was "ousted" (i.e. knife raped to death) because Khadaffi was committing war crimes when his government fought back against Jihadi rebels in Libya's civil war so he needed to be removed because that would be a big improvement for the poow, poow Libwyans (funny how quickly they were forgotten afterwards btw).
Haven't ya'll learned by now how the War Party and their propaganda Megaphone (MSM) operates when it wants to escalate any given situation to armed conflict? Can't you see the pattern?
I do see a pattern, but you may want to maintain a little more flexibility this time than is usual for you. Word is that Putin is really pissed at Assad for going ahead with that sarin attack. So, you may want to be ready to switch positions real quick if Putin decides to abandon him and list the sarin attack as a cause. You don't wanna get yourself overcommitted to your story line here in case Putin decides to abandon it.
Yes, I have been amused by Radio-Right-Wing being so extraordinarily quiet on a subject that animated them so much just a year ago.
At some point in time the heat will catch up to them. Judging by the numbers from our special election, and the further slide in the one in Kansas, the Republican party in general may be in for some rough waters. Trump has only been in office for 3 months. It's going to be a horrible 4 years.
Aussies talkin’ ‘bout Sweden, and afflictions with ‘fake news’.
"… if Putin decides to abandon [Assad] and list the sarin attack as
a cause."
Well apparently that's not gonna happen after all; I guess the meeting with Tillerson didn't go all that well from Putin's point of view. After first suggesting that the UN conduct an investigation into the sarin attack, Putin has now done a full 180° and the Russians have vetoed that resolution (apparently they object to the portion of the resolution calling for the Syrians to actually coöperate with the UN investigation). ABCNews So, I guess Marcus can crawl as far out on that limb as pleases, confident now that Putin won't saw the limb off behind him (except for the pretending there was no sarin release part of it, which Marcus probably should dial back on since even Putin won't go out there with him).
The Russians now claim they want an independent investigation of the incident. Not clear whom it's supposed to be ‘independent’ from.
@ Lynnette,
Ya s’pose the dedicated Trumkins will even notice the speed with which Shorthands has been abandoning his campaign promises and positions this past week to ten days? (I'm personally of the opinion that they won't notice anything so long as he tells them repeatedly that he's personally repealed ObamaCare and built them a Great Wall and Made America Great Again--all he'll have to do is claim it's all true and he'll get his 40% or so of dedicated Trumpkins to stick with him).
Funny you should mention that abandoning his campaign promises thing. I just saw this article about Trump's change of heart, perhaps, on positions he has taken in the past. Apparently now NATO isn't quite such a bad thing after all. I say "perhaps" because I'm not quite sure what he will decide tomorrow.
Within a few hours of extraordinary political shape-shifting, President Donald Trump abandoned stances that were at the bedrock of his establishment-bashing campaign.
NATO, he said, is "no longer obsolete."
From Lee's Aussie article:
Such "weaponised narratives" are both spawned and amplified by networks of conspiracy theorists, bloggers, trolls and bots.
It is amazing the gullibility of some who believe that everything peddled on the internet is real.
Btw, I haven't checked, does anyone know if The Saker is still around?
He's no longer blogging. He's turned it into an accretion website along the lines of Breitbart or Drudge, but, obviously, with a different political view to sell, and not near the traffic either of them have.
But, I'm guessing he's getting paid well for it these days.
http://thesaker.is/
Oh, he's blogging all right. But it has gotten far more professional in appearance, if not in journalistic objectivity.
Yes, I would agree that he is probably getting well paid for it.
I don't think that really qualifies as a blog anymore. But, I guess the definition is somewhat fluid.
Lee: "So, I guess Marcus can crawl as far out on that limb as pleases, confident now that Putin won't saw the limb off behind him"
I was always confident that your wild speculation about Putin being mad at Assad for a supposed gas-attack and ready to throw him under the bus was just you putting some faith in Fake News. Didn't even bother to respond when I read your first mentioning of that because it was so ludicrous.
Lee: "except for the pretending there was no sarin release part of it, which Marcus probably should dial back on since even Putin won't go out there with him"
On that one I suggest you dial back yourself and go back and look for a quote where I said my stance was there had been no gas-release. Fetch, boy!
Lee's Aussie article is a very typical example of the shitty mass media ya'll take for gospel. From the outset it states:
-----------------------------------------------
"No one doubts immigration, terrorism and sexual violence are real issues in the country. In fact, they are issues helping fuel the rise of the country's far-right party in the polls.
But the claim that liberal democracies like Sweden are somehow unable to cope with these, or any 21st century challenge, is not true."
-----------------------------------------------
Really? How does he know that? Because we're sure as hell not coping very well right about now. And I'm not even talking about the latest bus attack here.
And that's in a booming economy when we're able to throw serious amounts of money at the problems. What happens when the economy tanks?
And what does this clown even know about the situation on the streets of Sweden and in the suburbs to Swedish cities?
He starts from a made up assumption that he picked because it fits his narrative and then proceeds to call those of a different opinion Trolls or conspiracy theorists. He can go swim with crocodiles for all I care.
And I did notice that the picture with the caption saying "Malmo, Sweden: no stranger to online claims from around the world." is taken of Västra Hamnen, which is the most expensive area by far in inner city Malmö, right on the water front and extremely "white" by population.
Now, if you're talking about the "claims" about Malmö having real problems in some areas especially, isn't that quaint and prosperous part a strange pick for an image? Why was that pic chosen do you imagine? By chance? Really?
"Lee's Aussie article is a very typical example of the shitty mass
media ya'll take for gospel."
Ah, and there ya are, tellin’ me what I believe again. You're so very often wrong, and so seldom aware of it.
"Didn't even bother to respond when I read your first mentioning of
that because it was so ludicrous."
I think it more likely that you simply have no credible other explanation for why Putin would suggest a UN investigation of the Syrian sarin attack, and then, within 48 hours, instruct his UN ambassador to veto that very resolution.
MIT Professor debunks the claim that there are "proofs" Assad government were responsible for the gas attack in Syria. Furthermore he claims the evidence at hand (if not fabricated) suggests the attack was unleashed from the ground, not from an aircraft:
"I have reviewed the document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria at roughly 6 to 7 a.m. on April 4, 2017.
In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document points to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of April 4."
https://www.scribd.com/document/344995943/Report-by-White-House-Alleging-Proof-of-Syria-as-the-Perpetrator-of-the-Nerve-Agent-Attack-in-Khan-Shaykhun-on-April-4-2017#from_embed
(14 page analysis.)
This is the same guy who decided that Assad wasn't behind the gas attacks in 2013, isn't he? I've seen him referred to as a ‘leading chemical weapons expert’ and ‘a leading nuclear disarmament expert’ and a ‘ballistic missile expert’. He's pretty much whatever Russia Today needs him to be at any particular moment in time.
Let's see how well his ‘analysis’ holds up after it gets picked apart by some real experts, which will undoubtedly happen, and which you will probably never notice.
Debate in early April between Assad and his generals.
"I think we should just gas Idlib, what do we have, do we have Sarin?"
"Mr President we gave all our chemical weapons up."
"Well find some new or cook up a new batch. I have a hankerin' for a gasserin', hehe. So let's gas Idlib."
"But Mr President is that wise? Now that finally after so many years of demanding your ousting the Americans say they might let you stay on. Why antagonize them?"
"Didn't you hear Trump? He only wants to fight Daesh. I can do whatever I want and what I want right now is to gas Idlib."
"But the rebels in Idlib pose no real threat to us Mr President. We're currently winning on the ground and moving slowly towards their positions."
"Too slowly. I wanna hit 'em now!"
"But Mr President we have no ground forces to follow up such an attack. It would only mean killing a few rebels and maybe a lot of civilians could get in the way while we have no real means to capitalize on suck a strike."
"Good. Do it!"
"But... Putin won't be best pleased. Shouldn't we at least hear what the Russians think? They are our airforce and our protector from any western attack?"
"Nah, I'll speak with Vlad later on. Easier to apologise than ask permission you know. Let's gas 'em!"
"But Mr President. There is really a very limited upside to this, if any, but the downside is huge. It could be catastrophical. WHY are you so dead set on gassing Idlib?"
"For the LULZ!"
Does that sort of argument work on your right-winger sites?
You saw an argument there? I guess you see an argument everywhere. No matter the time or day there's an argument that the great Lee C will take on and win (in his own mind). Man, I bet the locals down at your usual watering hole are dead sick and tired of you. Probably talk about you behind your back and sigh meaningly towards eachother when you walk in the door. Like "here comes this knowitall again, now the peace and quiet and gentle banter we had is out the door."
"You saw an argument there?"
I thought I was being generous. Could have also described it as unfortunately too public self-gratification, but that would have been less generous.
Just as a reminder:
"Neither I nor Lynnette ever thought nor ever claimed that he did it
for fun. I suspect you create that strawman to fight because that's the
arguement you think you can win."
Lee C. @ Sun Apr 09, 11:40:00 am
And that's still true.
Based Poles:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_BjPy19bYs
The future lies East. The West is in dire straits. Not lost yet but not far from it.
The song "go west", popular in the late 80's will be turned 180 degrees and soon. Go east will come to mean liberty and prosperity.
Myself I plan to visit Budapest Hungary (where based Orban rules - the EU:s greatest politician) in May and a return visit to my favourit city Prague in late July (based government also). No headscarfs on the streets, no begging gypsies in every storefront, no street-violence (apart from football hooligans who duke it out for fun amongst themselves), great places. Poland is definetly on my list of go to places in the future.
Good to know you've picked a side.
You were iin doubt 'bout that? Im shocked! Shocked I tells ya!
There are some elements of classical fascism that you'd not clearly embraced. It may yet prove that you don't fully embrace all the doctrines associated with fascist orthodoxy, but I'd reckon you're close ‘nuff to whole package to accept the label.
@ Lynnette,
According to Politico.com Shorthands' hard-core, early supporters are slowly turning on him. These are not the dedicated Trumpkins he picked up during the campaign; these are members of the ‘two Steves’ camp, serious anti-government types who expected Shorthands to make Marcus happy.
The more normal (and more numerous) dedicated Trumpkins, the ones who think he's gonna actually deliver stuff instead of just tear down stuff--the coal miners and the assembly line workers who think he's gonna make mining and manufacturing profitable again, the farmers who think that tearing down the EPA will make farming profitable again, they've yet to be discouraged, but this is significant nonetheless, if it's really happening.
So.. Trump drops the MOAB into Afghanistan....
Not sure what I make of that.
You can chalk it up to Shorthands wasn't involved in the decision-making process there. Afghanistan's one of those problems the generals are handling on account of he's not interested and has abdicated responsibility. If something good happens he'll come around to collect the credit, but otherwise he's not interested.
In fact, when Shorthands was told about it he didn't know whether to deflect, grab on, or what the hell to do. CBSNews That's perhaps the first he'd heard about it. He may or may not have come in for his morning briefing that day, but if he'd actually heard about it before the press told him, it didn't sink, least not deep ‘nuff to stick.
Interesting analysis of the Korean situation.
Those troublesome Koreans
He's a lot more optimistic about the Chinese actually doing something than I think is warranted. They've gone for years and not leaned on the North Koreans too hard--not as much reason to think that's changed as many people seem to hope.
So.. Trump drops the MOAB into Afghanistan....
Not sure what I make of that.
It might have been this simple:
General John Nicholson, the U.S. Commander in Afghanistan, said he used the bomb so Afghan troops and their American advisers wouldn’t have to go in on the ground to clear out the caves. There are an estimated 600-800 ISIS fighters in Afghanistan, most of them located in Nangarhar province, near the Pakistan border.
The strike had been in the works for a number of months, dating back to the Obama administration, which is when the bomb itself had been moved into Afghanistan. The authority to use the bomb had been delegated to Nicholson, although he notified Washington in advance, Martin reports.
It is a bomb designed to penetrate deep under ground. And given the nature of the cave system in that area it would have been a suitable choice to use.
I see that the Chinese abstained on the recent Syria resolution. That was rather surprising, given their propensity to vote in lock step with Russia.
They've gone for years and not leaned on the North Koreans too hard--not as much reason to think that's changed as many people seem to hope.
That might very well be the case. There would have to be some kind of catalyst to encourage them to act, I suppose.
McKay Coppins, writing in TheAtlantic discovers polling data which suggests that the Republican ‘base’, those Republican voters who show up for the primaries, man the telephone banks and make the small dollar donations (the most importantant part being that they show up to vote in the primaries), they seem to have redefined the term ‘conservative’ to mean ‘support for Trump’. The more vocal ones support for Trump, the more likely they'd think of one approvingly as ‘a conservative’.
(Short piece by The Atlantic's standards.)
Damnedest thing I'd seen for awhile.
And then I saw this in the Wall Street Journal. The author here thinks that because some of the more hawkish Democrats have praised Trump's strike against Assad they'll now be obliged to embrace Trump's economic agenda, written as it is for the supply-side economic fantasists. Gotta wonder how a guy writing fool stuff like this managed to get a position writing op-eds for the Wall Street Journal.
And, finally, we have a guy writing for the British Spectator that the Swedes are seriously split these days on how to handle their immigrant surge. Apparently the two leading camps are ‘let's ignore the problem and maybe it'll go away’ and ‘let's pretend that being mad about it is actually a solution’. Neither one of those theories seem to hold out much promise of success.
"It is a bomb designed to penetrate deep under ground."
You are conflating the MOAB with the MOP (Wiki-link), the latter is penetrator. It's a fairly common error even in the general press; presumably they'll get it sorted out in a couple of days.
The North Koreans have threatened a pre-emptive nuclear attack against whom they did not specify. CBSNews They're presumed to not yet have the capability to strike against American assets other than those in South Korea, where we've still got, I think, on the order of 35,000 to 38,000 troops stationed.
Glenn Beck just said on the air (Radio-Right-Wing), that both Russia and China have moved troops to their borders with North Korea as if in anticipation of something gonna happen maybe as soon as this weekend. (The Russian border with North Korea is very limited, but it does exist; the Russians hold a strip along the seacoast along what would otherwise be northern Chinese territory.)
It's Glenn Beck, so…
Lee: "You are conflating the MOAB with the MOP (Wiki-link), the latter is penetrator. It's a fairly common error even in the general press; presumably they'll get it sorted out in a couple of days."
But won't the MOAB kill deep underground also? My understanding is that these massive bombs suck out all oxygen from the vincinity and leave even those not blown up by the actual charge dead by asphyxiation. Unless the Talibs have blast proof doors down in their caves and tunnels they most likely choked.
Now that I've read more about it the reporting is that some 30-40 ISIS fuckers were killed and no civvies. That'd make it a warranted and good strike in my book, if those reports are reliable.
Lee: "The North Koreans have threatened a pre-emptive nuclear attack against whom they did not specify. CBSNews They're presumed to not yet have the capability to strike against American assets other than those in South Korea, where we've still got, I think, on the order of 35,000 to 38,000 troops stationed."
A big part of the problem with a strike at NK that many people do not really know of is they focus on the possible nuclear power of NK. While their conventional deterrence is actually quite severe.
The NK army numbers in the millions and on the border with SK they reportedly have about 80.000 artillery tubes directed right across the border at Seoul population 10 million. Those cannons are dug into the mountains and any strike will not get most of them.
So any attack at NK will see much of Seoul in ashes. Nukes or no nukes.
I have commies and I hate the NK regime, which is one of the most vile on earth, but attacking them with military force is not something I would advocate.
As for their nuclear capabilities at this stage I think they are actually pretty slim. They could maybe propell a nuke into SK by some sort of carrier, or maybe smuggle one across the border. It's a possibility.
But even to hit Japan they are ways off so far. They have fired dumb rockets that possibly could reach and hit Japan, but to get one of them rockets to carry a nuke and detonate in the right place at the right time - nah, they're not there yet, not close. Hitting mainland USA they are miles off of.
"But won't the MOAB kill deep underground also?"
That may very well be a good part of the reason people tend to confuse the two.
"A big part of the problem with a strike at NK that many people do not
really know of is they focus on the possible nuclear power of NK."
They made a threat of a nuclear first strike. So, yeah, I did note they likely didn't have that capability just yet. I've mentioned many times that they have the capability to reduce Seoul to rubble before they lose the war--I'm not going to change my mind on that just because you agree. (It's almost certain they'd lose that war--the South Koreans can take ‛em, but, unfortunately, not before they reduce Seoul to rubble.)
Lee: "I'm not going to change my mind on that just because you agree."
Wow! Must be hard for you to just have to agree for once. Not arguing about points about arguments of a point's point. A novelty. Virgin grounds.
NYT article noting that Trump is maintaining his dedicated Trumpkin base, who're largely not at all disturbed by his many flip-flops. (He is losing the true-believer ideological reactionaries, although his nomination of, and the confirmation of, Gorsuch has held them off abandoning him in droves. This is exposing an unknown weakness the Paul Ryan's of the party are having to deal with for the first time--many of their Republican ‘base’ are not true-believers at all, but merely angry anarchists.)
The one thing that will lose Trump the support of his dedicated Trumpkins is a perception of incompetence. (Those mining and manufacturing jobs ain't comin’ back folks; deal with it.) But, that'll take longer to sink in, as they were expecting a longer delivery time on those.
"Wow! Must be hard for you…"
"You're so very often wrong, and so seldom aware of it."
Lee C. @ Thu Apr 13, 04:10:00 am ↑↑
This was merely another example.
By the way, has anybody noticed the recent TrumpTweets? It's beginning to look like the young Jews made him both accept an editor and give up his shitterphone (recent Trumptweets have all been on an iPhone instead of his old 3:00 am Android shitterphone).
Well it looks like they are doing the Easter Egg hunt after all! I had read somewhere that they were ignoring that tradition.
It also looks like he is tweeting his fairyland vision of his presidency.
Yeah, well, that's where he lives.
The Emperor has no clothes syndrome.
They were talking on CNN about Obama's warning to Trump as he was leaving office that North Korea was actually the most dangerous foreign challenge to the United States.
There was a big parade there (North Korea) today showing off their military hardware. Unlike the conflicts in the Middle East a conflict in the Korean Peninsula would affect the homelands of major powers in the region as well as allies of the United States. Both China and Russia have moved troops to their borders with North Korea. I can see why the former President was concerned.
At the moment Trump is playing golf. *sigh*
"At the moment Trump is playing golf."
That may be a good thing. There's a limited amount of trouble he can get into out there, and he's less likely to come up with ‘a plan’ (I hope).
Lee: "The one thing that will lose Trump the support of his dedicated Trumpkins is a perception of incompetence. (Those mining and manufacturing jobs ain't comin’ back folks; deal with it.) But, that'll take longer to sink in, as they were expecting a longer delivery time on those."
That and I'd add firing Bannon, or sidelining Bannon enough for him to resign. I'd guess that'd cost him the Breitbart crew, which is a not insignificant portion of those "dedicated Trumpkins". At least that's my take on it.
From what I read most of 'em see some victories, such as Gorsuch (as you mention) and also they credit illegals leaving volontarily to Trump. Gorsuch IS a win for their side, not sure about the supposed exudous of illegal immigrants though. But they definetly see Bannon as "their guy" in the White House and if he would resign or get sacked, which looks like a possibility, then they'd probably jump off of that Trump Train they imgine they're on.
Lynnette: "There was a big parade there (North Korea) today showing off their military hardware."
I saw that too. Noticed a whole column of supposed mobile ICBM:s there. My guess is those were just for show, probably empty tubes or possibly not yet functioning rockets. Also the tanks look like they would function against soldiers on the ground only, but not really against an opposing tank force. I'd bet an Abrams with a decent crew could make minced meat out of 20 of those before they even got within firing range. On the other hand artillery still remains king of the battlefield and they do have cannons - they are easy enough to produce.
Lee's assessment is probably pretty accurate. SK would win, even without any more help than those 35K US troops, and easier still with added US air support. But the cost of that win would be horrible.
"…the Breitbart crew, …is a not insignificant portion of those
‘dedicated Trumpkins’."
They fall into the ‘two Steves’ faction. (↑↑ Thu Apr 13, 03:39:00 pm). Trump would have lost if he'd lost 77,000 only votes (about .12% of his total take--roughly the number of people who'd show up for a major college football game on any given weekend, mind you that's not 12% but rather 12 hundreths of one percent) scattered across the three states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, all of which Hillary expected to win (part of her theoretical ‘Blue Wall’). There are no ‘insignificant portions’ of his coalition, but these people are not ‘dedicated Trumpkins’.
The illegals went to negative immigration numbers years ago, the falloff began in the early years of the second Bush administration, and continued all through the Obama years. For several years now the largest percentage of our illegal immigrants has been refugees fleeing Central and South America and coming through Mexico to get here. Those people used to get across, get a little distance from the border, and then most of them would hunt down and find a border agent to surrender to so they could file their asylum claim. They quit trying to find border guards to surrender to after Trump became President, because the new policy is to ignore their request to make an asylum claim and ship them back across the border before they can contact a lawyer or a judge or anybody who can stop the Border Patrol. Whether actual crossings have fallen off much is an open question, but the voluntary surrenders to Border Patrol agents have sure the hell fallen off. Trump is proclaiming this to be a great victory for his team. Maybe it is.
OK, sounds about all right. What about Bannon though? You agree with me on that or not?
"…then they'd probably jump off of that Trump Train they imgine
they're on."
It would definitely put a crimp in their enthusiasm. They're gettin’ publicly twitchy already. There's open speculation that Bannon might return to Breitbart and launch a vengeance crusade against Trump. (It's an open secret that some of the right-winger, high-roller donor types had to talk Bannon out of resigning already. So, that dynamic is tensed up and waiting to perhaps explode.)
If anybody's interested in a detailed play-by-play of the Bannon slide in the Trump administration, then VanityFair has a fairly long, and fairly tedious, report on it. This thing could have been half this length, but the author seems to have been having too much fun. I don't pretend to know what the hell the editors let her get away with it.
typo:
should be "…why the hell the editors let her get away with it."
Lee's assessment is probably pretty accurate. SK would win, even without any more help than those 35K US troops, and easier still with added US air support. But the cost of that win would be horrible.
I think we are all in agreement on this. The fallout would also be bad for others in the region. Oh, maybe not in lost lives, but in an influx of refugees from NK.
It seems that the fighting between the Kushner side and the Bannon side is basically a struggle between the moderates and the extremists. It has always been a better move for the President to migrate his policies toward the center once he is in office. Because simply put the majority of Americans are in general more moderate. Unless they are pushed. Leaving someone like Bannon to help advise on policy will be a trigger for those demonstrations we are seeing all over the place. In the long run it would be best to sideline him. Even if it alienates some of those Breitbart fans.
"It has always been a better move for the President to migrate his
policies toward the center once he is in office."
I disagree. The moderates do not trust him. His recent policy flips will not increase their trust in him in any perceptible measure. They have virtually no incentive to do business with him, because they recognize that he cannot be trusted. Better they should replace him with somebody they can trust. The moderates in Congress may vote for some of his newly adopted positions and programs, assuming he decides to advocate something they already want, but they're not going to negotiate with him (they don't trust him). So, it will be better for the moderates if he moderates his policies, but it will do him little good.
His best move would be to stick with his program and try to figure out a way to keep his coalition together. That's not working for him just now, damn little chance it'll work for him in the future, but there's likewise damn little chance he's actually gonna come up with a better plan. Trying to move to the middle sure ain't gonna be it.
Perhaps you've noticed his recent totally unsubtle hints for the Democrats to come to him and beg for concessions? He's not been gettin’ any takers on that.
His best move would be to stick with his program and try to figure out a way to keep his coalition together.
If he sticks with his more extreme policies, cutting too much off various agencies, raising import fees, building his wall, either literally or figuratively, he will lose most of the country eventually. Because those policies will be too detrimental to too many people in the long run. It may take them a while to realize it, but eventually it will sink in.
You have a tendency to want to believe there's always gonna be at least one good option available.
It's the optimist in me.
Lynnette: "I think we are all in agreement on this. The fallout would also be bad for others in the region. Oh, maybe not in lost lives, but in an influx of refugees from NK."
Not just that though. If a hot war broke out and we all agree that SK could win it, then up pops the question of China. Would they let that slide? Would they accept a NATO-allied reunified Korea on their border? Or would they even be prepared to go to war to stop such a thing? They were before, maybe they still are.
Lee: "I disagree. The moderates do not trust him. His recent policy flips will not increase their trust in him in any perceptible measure. [...]
His best move would be to stick with his program and try to figure out a way to keep his coalition together."
Probably true. Hell I find myself agreeing with Lee so much I have to ddo a re-think and a triple-think before I post these days.
Anyway, Trump won't win new friends in the center, he can only hope to keep those he's got. And trying to keep the ones he's got actually means fighting for the issues that got him elected. If he renegs on that he loses his base and he won't be picking up a new one.
Post a Comment