Rigging the Election|DNC incited violence at Trump rallies

Post Reply New Topic

You really don't have to go that far, there's a whole basket of deplorables that agree with that assertion. Google results show hundreds of thousands of hits!

People are misinformed thru the media and if that is your only outlet into this election then you probably won't understand it, it won't have any context to you. Simple as that. Of course you can't understand the issues with immigration to America or our borders, of course you are going to have differing opinions on trade agreements that affect your country differently than ours, you don't know what biases our media has, and most of all you don't know Hillary Clinton because the media doesn't ask questions nor do they report the extent of her corruption.

Yes, giving back Hong Kong was a strategic mistake by the Brits, they lost their main point of control in South East Asia, that being said they had to because as the empire decayed so did the economic viability of Hong Kong to the British. Hong Kong was fine, so long as they controlled the entire sea route from Hong Kong to India to South Africa to West Africa, then to Britain. Once they lost the Boer War and thus South Africa, and then India, Hong Kong became economically unviable so they were forced to unload it, political strategy be damned. Also remember, the agreement to hand over Hong Kong was done a century before it actually happened-- hence the reason the Boer War and problems in India being pertinent to the deal.

As for the Panama Canal, we financed it, we didn't really build it. There were some Americans there but the majority of workers were Panamanians and Costa Ricans, and the engineering was done by the French. We treated those laborers like s**t, but that's beside the point. Relinquishing the Panama Canal was what I would call neutral-- our ships still get basically free port fees (American vessels are only charged cost), and we don't have the headache of overseeing a large infrastructure far away from the States. That said, we did relinquish control which loosened our grip on the entirety of South America-- and that could have repercussions in the future. It's also another chip we could have used for trade leverage with other countries that we just don't have now. So yeah neutral, leaning slightly bad.

That said, Ukraine is not that place. Ukraine is vital to western Europe's buffer. The Polish are some of our strongest allies in Europe, and if Ukraine falls they're next. I already mentioned the food importance and the trade importance there so I'm not going to rehash that, but yes, Ukraine is a vitally important region-- it always has been, it's been theorized that grain from the Ukraine region was what actually started the Trojan War all the way back ~1000 B.C.

As for Syria, I'm all for that going the way of the dodo. If Russia wants it so bad, they can have it-- assuming they move from the Ukraine. If not, then yes, we need to be there-- again, for a chip on the table to negotiate what we really want.

That said, just giving Russia things to appease them-- that's ridiculous.

Jacoby, my intense and informed interest in USA politics began on this date:

22nd November 1963.

I have acquired much learning during the many decades since, (and not just from newspapers here, that assumption is false). I read very widely, actually. You can learn a lot in 53 years.

Let me see if I understand the plan. The US and Russia divide up the world again like the old colonial powers?

Well, that's the way things are going. Best to have the upper hand before it gets to that apex-- that's my point.

There is a difference between giving things to Russia and taking things, I think the idea that Russia would put Poland at risk of anything is pretty silly given the anti-Russian sentiment there and western Ukraine is similar in that sentiment probably in an even more extremist way as the Ukrainians were Nazi collaborators and still idolize their Nazi era leaders so they're still there as a buffer. What makes the most sense is Poland take back Galicia and the east to Russia, the linguistic and political divisions make this divorce very easy. Russia was not going to allow itself to be kicked out of the Black Sea, to pretend like that was ever a possibility I think is not very realistic. The Ukrainian Navy suffered mass defection after the coup in Kiev, their own high command and soldiers were more loyal to Yanukovych and Russia than they were the anti-Russian coupists.

Perhaps a better example would be the Baltic countries which actually have significant Russian minorities, one deal they can make that might really help relations is to allow Russia access to Kaliningrad instead of isolating and threatening to blockade it.

Jacoby, have you spared a thought for the people of that region who want a multi-party democracy?

What region are you talking about?

I was thinking of Eastern Europe in general, but any region will do.

Looks like creative edit-er O'Keefe is at it again:

http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/18/projec ... on-videos/

So the issue with O'Keefe and the ACORN videos is that he was not actually there in the costume he used to promote the videos with, I don't think that really matters or is misleading. It's misleading to say that is misleading I think. The main way they've attacked O'Keefe and others like him is thru laws that make it illegal to film someone without their knowledge and consent which basically outlaws sting journalism.

Dude, are you like on pot or something? O'Keefe is known to edit his videos to make people and organizations look worse than they are, and ACORN was cleared of any wrongdoing.

White House denies Obama friends with Democratic operative linked to agitators at Trump rallies - Washington Times

I'm pretty sure that's offensive to potheads.

Those are privacy laws to protect every American, and they've been widely accepted by the majority for literally decades. They were in place well before O'Keefe spawned out whatever disgusting pit he came from-- so yes, he frequently breaks the law, thanks for admitting it.

Edit: And that's not even to mention breaking into an elected official's office attempting to steal information-- ala Watergate. What's the defense on that one, it's a-ok if I don't like the victim?

It's a tad bit ridiculous for Obama to deny knowing this guy right? 340 visits to the White House seems like a lot. Chicago area Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky is his wife and is one of the closest Obama allies in the House, you can look up a whole bunch of pictures of them together and have a long history together.

It seems like Creamer has quite a past by the way as he is a convicted felon and served time in prison, much like Obama's other Chicago friends convicted felons Tony Rezko(currently in prison), Rod Blagojevich(currently in prison), Jesse Jackson Jr(released in 2015), and of course the terrorist Bill Ayers. That's just off the top of my head, I am sure there is more. These are the people associated with Barack Obama, we all know how corrupt Chicago politics is so it's really not that hard to believe as this is exactly how it works in that city. You don't think Obama rose from obscurity as a 'community organizer' to the leader of the most powerful nation of earth without being in the good graces of Chicago mobster politicians do you?

The rabbit hole goes DEEP with this one