Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Masark]

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/kayle...tion-ppp-loan/

I suppose welfare recipients are only supposed to feel shame if they aren't blonde and vacuous.

[Masark]

I have to ask, doesn't your country know how many people a company is employing at all times?

Probably not in this case, as the form asks for "jobs supported" not "employees". If you figure in independent contractors or such, those two numbers may not be the same thing.

[Thekri]

These numbers that you are giving are pure fantasy and I expected someone like you to do better then that. I understand, rightly, why you are furious over the Kurds being abandoned to Erdogan and Russia, because let's be fair no reasonable person has any love for the would-be Turkish Sultan and his campaign of grandeur which is getting a lot of people killed, but frankly throwing made-up numbers on the subject of Syria is hardly a solution.

I readily admit that those numbers are my personal projections based on my personal experience in the area. Unlike the numbers you are quoting there, I am not counting combat deaths, I am talking about the death tolls of mass displacement, poverty, and disease that have occured as a direct consequence, these numbers are impossible to quantify in absolute terms, but I am confident they are in the range I stated. As far as the millions, that is a dire look at the future. A simple fact of history is that Wars do not kill all that many people, but famines resulting from wars kill millions and annihilate entire cultural groups. We seem to be on the precipice of reaching that point, with a deliberate famine used for operational purposes. We have seen this many times before, and it skyrockets the death toll like nothing else does.

As far as the rest of your post, I don't entirely disagree, and have stated so many times. However, while there is no good way to leave, there are clearly much worse ways to leave. I have several long rants on that Subject for Afghanistan, and my opinion there extends to Syria. We do need to leave, we do not need to make matters much worse on its way out. In Syria there is one major difference, and that is Russian involvement. Yes, the United States should definitely reconsider how it engages in local conflicts in the middle east, but balancing out a major power requires another world power. If Russia is going to weaponize Famine, the US is one of the only nations in the world that can realistically counterbalance that. We are (mostly) out of Syria now, and under no circumstances should we go back in, but we do have a responsibility there still.

[Themius]

Thought this was a good break down of a lot of crazy shit the slips through the cracks.

[Breccia]

California, Texas and Fuck Florida set new record death counts.

Utah declares state of emergency.

Kentucky moves to mandate masks in public.

And Nevada closes bars in Las Vegas again. Bars. In Las Vegas.

It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.

EDIT: The latest ABC poll has Trump's coronavirus approval at 33% -- the lowest since the poll began. It dropped from 41% to 33% in the time since mid-June, right about when Fuck Florida.

Independents in particular have soured -- their approval now stands at 29%.

"Yes, but his base is unbreakable."

Support amongst Republicans has dropped from 90% to 78%. No, it isn't. Remember, there's a lot of red states where the lethal outbreak is more outbreaking and more lethal since mid-June. And that number is inflated. What, specifically, did Trump do that was meant to help? Not what he said he did, what he actually did. Leadership and action from the top has been too little, too late, and Trump personally has been fighting it, pushing for re-openings without any guidance or support -- leading to the re-closings and increases linked above. Like, the last thirty pages of "linked above". 78% is bullshit.

[Thekri]

I'm fairly certain responding to a military-led Iran would very much be an important agenda item. Unless I'm very much mistaken, their military isn't exactly of the progressive bent.

Well, it is a lot more complex then that. I haven't made a thread about it because there is really no useful information to base any sort of analysis on. We just don't know enough to do any useful speculation.

Iran claimed they were accidents for the first 3 or 4 incidents, which strongly indicates they thought it was a domestic problem. Now they are claiming it is the US and/or Israel, because of course they are. The thing to remember here is just because it is apparently being done by Iranians does not mean it isn't an US or Israeli operation, or at least significant involvement utilizing a discontented faction.

It also doesn't necessarily mean that the faction in question is a religious hardliner. This is not the IRGC, this is apparently some mix of Iranian regular military and the Iranian academia. They actually might be quite progressive, Iranians, especially the Persian Diaspora, really want a western Style government, and increasingly loath the Theocracy that the government currently is. Those massive protests we saw weren't encouraging the government to get MORE Theocratic.

So basically every option is on the table, and we really have no idea what is going on. It could be a CIA or Mossad backed operation, it could be a Russian backed operation to eliminate Iranian technological independence, it could be Iranian religious hardliners masquerading as progressives, it could be actual progressives, it could be anything. Except accidents. It isn't a series of unfortunate accidents. It is a serious mistake to assume it is one particular option right now, we just don't have enough information.

[CostinR]

I readily admit that those numbers are my personal projections based on my personal experience in the area. Unlike the numbers you are quoting there, I am not counting combat deaths, I am talking about the death tolls of mass displacement, poverty, and disease that have occured as a direct consequence, these numbers are impossible to quantify in absolute terms, but I am confident they are in the range I stated. As far as the millions, that is a dire look at the future. A simple fact of history is that Wars do not kill all that many people, but famines resulting from wars kill millions and annihilate entire cultural groups. We seem to be on the precipice of reaching that point, with a deliberate famine used for operational purposes. We have seen this many times before, and it skyrockets the death toll like nothing else does.

While you have a valuable point we haven't seen a situation in Syria of mass starvation on the level you are suggesting, nowhere close even because unlike say Yemen where food has pretty much run out this hasn't happened in Syria, nor will it given that all of Syria's neighbors have a vested interest in not seeing swarms of hungry refugees crossing their borders.

Even Russia doesn't actually want to see hundreds of thousands or millions of people starve to death, rather what they want to do is weaponize the food aid shipments to ensure they gain an upper hand, especially as they are seeking to reclaim Idlib: That is the crux of what they are trying to do her, cut off Idlib from UN food aid to put pressure on them and more realistically on Turkey.

As far as the rest of your post, I don't entirely disagree, and have stated so many times. However, while there is no good way to leave, there are clearly much worse ways to leave.

While there's truth to that, the US did what many countries have done over millennia, they took advantage of a weaker group and then abandoned them because it was convenient to do so. At the end of the day while Trump could have handled it considerably better, especially as got bent over the table by Erdogan. Seriously: I'd have slammed the phone down in rage in that Sultan's face then flown in an entire airborne division into Syria along with a carrier strike group off the shores of Istanbul and DARED Erdogan to actually attack US troops as he threatened to, but to know that if he does he's next....Trump instead ran like a little girl.

I have several long rants on that Subject for Afghanistan, and my opinion there extends to Syria. We do need to leave, we do not need to make matters much worse on its way out. In Syria there is one major difference, and that is Russian involvement. Yes, the United States should definitely reconsider how it engages in local conflicts in the middle east, but balancing out a major power requires another world power. If Russia is going to weaponize Famine, the US is one of the only nations in the world that can realistically counterbalance that. We are (mostly) out of Syria now, and under no circumstances should we go back in, but we do have a responsibility there still.

No, you don't, you shouldn't. The 90s era mentality where the people in the US national security institutions believed democracy could be pushed on the whole world has sailed away, every time you've tried to do that in the 2001-2017 era it ended up being an unmitigated failure. It doesn't help the bloody State Department believes that the solution to every tyrant is to use a carrier strike group: Heck, I remember they pushed Obama to bomb Syria.

The Arab World is largely a lost cause for the next few decades except places like Jordan. Let Russia handle it, they have a better grasp of what it takes to achieve stability in countries like these and it is them repeating the Chechnya model, even if it using starvation as a war weapon. America has proven it doesn't.

You'd be better off protecting fragile democracies in Asia and Africa from China's insidious influence more then anything.

[Breccia]

You'd be better off protecting fragile democracies in Asia and Africa from China's insidious influence more then anything.

China is invading with money. It's really difficult to fight that with a leader who only wants to focus on domestic spending and tariffs.

In other news, NBC News reports a change to Trump's upcoming campaign. Specifically:

We can't have a repeat of Tulsa

-- exact fucking quote of Trump campaign official

Simply put, packed crowds are no longer realistic. In addition to the image-salvaging move to have these things outdoors, Trump's campaign has accepted that rallies will have lower turnouts specifically due to the health hazard. They're also talking about shortening the Trump ego trip to Jacksonville and actually testing everyone this time.

[CostinR]

China is invading with money. It's really difficult to fight that with a leader who only wants to focus on domestic spending and tariffs.

Yeah...the apocalyptic tariffs. Seriously that's a gigantic joke of an argument, always has been.

You know who has tariffs and a very difficult barrier of entry into their local markets? China.

As for the money? Cheap bribes that comes with a lot of strings attached to those that accept them, that they regret deeply when they figure it out. Provide economic incentives for those willing to shut out China and take harsh draconian measures against any willing to accept China's hand. Do it gradually over a period years of course but there is no room for both China and the US on the global stage, everyone will have to choose.

[Thekri]

While you have a valuable point we haven't seen a situation in Syria of mass starvation on the level you are suggesting, nowhere close even because unlike say Yemen where food has pretty much run out this hasn't happened in Syria, nor will it given that all of Syria's neighbors have a vested interest in not seeing swarms of hungry refugees crossing their borders.

Even Russia doesn't actually want to see hundreds of thousands or millions of people starve to death, rather what they want to do is weaponize the food aid shipments to ensure they gain an upper hand, especially as they are seeking to reclaim Idlib: That is the crux of what they are trying to do her, cut off Idlib from UN food aid to put pressure on them and more realistically on Turkey.

It hasn't happened yet. That was the whole point of my first post, where Russia and China are attempting to stop the flow off food into northern Syria. There have been far too many engineered famines in history to be blind to the threat of them happening. I agree that Russia wants leverage, not extermination, but that doesn't mean extermination doesn't happen "By accident" when when you weaponize food.

There are strong parallels to what Churchill did in Bengal in 1943. He wasn't trying to starve the Bengalis, he only wanted to remove "excess" food storage locations to prevent Japan from supplying its advancing armies by seizing local food supplies. But the consequence of that strategy was removing and destroying huge amounts of food, and THEN a Cyclone destroyed rice crops that were supposed to feed the people and THEN there was an outbreak in crop disease because the Bengalis were rushing to get another crop before they starved, and didn't properly separate their seed stock. So what happened is 2-3 million people starved to death. That wasn't the intent, but that is what happened, because stacking food shortages onto an already shit situation can turn a crappy year into an extinction event.

That is the problem with this strategy in Syria. These people are already on the brink, everything is already going terrible, and deliberately causing a food shortage on top of it can cause all sorts of interactions with the horrible shit that is already there. People are going to hoard what food they can, huge amounts of what is left is going to spoil due to improper storage, profiteering will be rampant, panics, and so forth. That is why it easily could be millions dead. I really hope it won't be, but the historical precedent is definitely there in far too many cases. Millions can absolutely die if nobody stops it. When empires play their shitty games, it is places like Syria that suffer.

The rest of your post is as usual, solid and reasonable. I don't agree with it all, but it is a shitty situation, and it is very hard to say either of us have the "right" approach. We both agree that the historical approach is shit, and the way forward is a collection of terrible choices. Your point is reasonable, and just like mine, has horrible consequences. There is no path we can take that does not have terrible consequences.

[Breccia]

Seriously that's a gigantic joke of an argument

It is a complete joke, China's building up massive amounts of allies while we're sitting back and taxing our own population. It's a losing strategy to retain status as the world leader, which is one of several reasons China's pulling ahead. Glad we're on the same page.

[Thekri]

It is a complete joke, China's building up massive amounts of allies while we're sitting back and taxing our own population. It's a losing strategy to retain status as the world leader, which is one of several reasons China's pulling ahead. Glad we're on the same page.

1) China is not pulling ahead. Not even close.
2) The "Allies" China is getting here are not ideological allies. They are economic allies that exist as long as China gives them free stuff.
3) China is in the incredibly difficult position of trying to build an alliance from the world's pariahs. The International System of Alliances that came out of WWII is a very strong, ideologically based alliance between all of the worlds top economies EXCEPT China.
4) The China vs. US paradigm is a false one to begin with. It is a very America-centric worldview that does not reflect reality. China isn't building a military to challenge the US, it is building its military to dominate regional rivals. The US stands with a huge array of powerful allies against that.
5) Trump's economic attacks on China are actually necessary. Those are actually a decent idea in concept, with the usual horrible horrific execution because he doesn't understand how they are supposed to work, and he seems to think that he can "Win" them and make more money off the deal. You can't. Economic Sanctions on China will be painful to both parties, and the way they are supposed to work is that the large economy can absorb the damage much easier. They way they SHOULD have worked is as a unified effort with all the allies.
6) Trump's most damaging effect on this rivalry is by alienating the alliance system. The US had good relations with 18 of the top 20 economies in the world under Obama, with Russia and China (#11 and #2 respectively) being the outliers. Turkey, at #19 was a maybe. Trump has burned bridges, and completely failed at leading this alliance to any goal. The US President is "Leader of the Free World" because he has historically been the person that can push this massive block of nations toward achieving mutually beneficial goals. Trump completely misunderstands this, and demands from them goals that only benefit himself and (maybe) the US. This means this entire block no longer presents a unified face toward any Crisis. Merkel has done a truly amazing job by stepping into a De Facto role as "Leader of the Free World", but Germany lacks the leverage the US has to really do the role, even though she personally is better at it then US presidents have been for decades.

[CostinR]

We both agree that the historical approach is shit, and the way forward is a collection of terrible choices. Your point is reasonable, and just like mine, has horrible consequences. There is no path we can take that does not have terrible consequences.

Well I guess we both have to live with that in a world of horrible choices and horrid consequences. Pretty depressing, but 'tis what is these days, great post.

[Breccia]

While most of this NBC News article is personal anecdotes from Texas restaurants, they do mention something called...sigh...the Real Economic Support that Acknowledges Unique Restaurant Assistance Needed to Survive Act of 2020. Yes, the RESTAURANTS Act. The proposal is for $120 billion more for small businesses, some of which haven't gotten the PPP funds that, apparently, Trump has been giving to his friends and allies. The article focuses on Texas restaurants, which apparently didn't pray for Trump hard enough.

The article focuses on Texas, and there's a reason for that. States that pushed re-opening and are now seeing a dramatic "Fuck Florida" level of COVID-19 cases and deaths have...well...

As COVID-19 cases in Texas spike, [local restaurant owner] Shepherd says elected officials have left restaurant owners in an impossible position - they can care for their own financial viability, or the health of their staff, but not both.

That. Basically, that.

The Tortured Acronym Act, put forth by the other NRA, looks to be a special case for McConnell. Unlike, say, the CARES Act(s), it seems self-contained. McConnell can't say "well let's put some more things I want into it". He basically has to vote it down, telling 11 million people they're not important to the Republican Party, or allow it to pass without getting anything for himself in return. Considering how hard he's pushing "No to Everything", I know what my guess is.

- - - Updated - - -

2) The "Allies" China is getting here are not ideological allies. They are economic allies that exist as long as China gives them free stuff.

Yes.

And Trump is allowing this without any attempt whatsoever to slow it or stop it. Which was my point in the first place. Business allies are still allies.

[Thekri]

Yes.

And Trump is allowing this without any attempt whatsoever to slow it or stop it. Which was my point in the first place. Business allies are still allies.

Which begs the question, why should we? Why the hell does America have the right to stop China from having economic allies? We are not at war with China, they do exist, they are a sovereign nation, not a terrorist group, why should we stop them from having economic allies?

We can, and should build our own alliances, but if you try to strangle a nation that hard, they are going to bomb you. That is exactly what we did to Japan in the 1930s, and they were left with no choice but to attack us or die slowly. (Wasn't really a winning option for Japan at point, war didn't work well for them either). I know our history books portray it somewhat differently, but what actually happened is the US blocked Japans access to resources and global trade, because they didn't want a rival in the western Pacific. After Tsushima, the US feared what Japan could do if it was allowed to grow, so we switched from Japan's ally to their rival overnight, and engaged in international politics to ensure Japan remained a pariah. Not saying Imperial Japan was not awful, they absolutely were, but war didn't start over any moral differences, it started because they were backed into a corner where they could fight or die.

There is no reason to have a war with China, but if we do what you seem to be suggesting, China will have no choice. Fight or be crushed slowly.

[Breccia]

Which begs the question, why should we? Why the hell does America have the right to stop China from having economic allies?

Oh, sorry, I was responding to "You'd be better off protecting fragile democracies in Asia and Africa from China's insidious influence more then anything."

[Thekri]

Oh, sorry, I was responding to "You'd be better off protecting fragile democracies in Asia and Africa from China's insidious influence more then anything."

Well that is somewhat true though. There is a difference between challenging Chinese influence and actually strangling out China's opportunity for growth. This is also the sort of area where a unified front is essential, because China isn't dumb enough to fight the worlds #1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16th largest economies at the same time. As long as it is a unified front, we have pretty broad leverage to push back against their shittiest actions, in a way that still allows them some leverage.

For instance, we really need to do something about China's massive mining efforts in Central Asia and Africa. The are strip mining entire mountains, and dumping the mining chemicals directly into local rivers. America did that too, and we are still trying to clean up our rivers, but a lot of that shit is permanent, resting in sediment layers. Because it is 2020, not 1920, China can do it on a scale America was never able too, and the environmental damage is even worse. Mining in Tajikistan is poisoning waterways that flow all the way to the indian Ocean, destroying all the river valleys along the way. Huge quantities of chlorides and worse are being pumped directly into rivers, I have seen the children covered in Blisters from bathing. We cannot, and should not, choke China off from those resources entirely, they are paying for them, and these countries depend on this income to improve their own nations. But we must work to stop the scale of the destruction, and use more ethical mining practices. We know China can do it, because they are doing exactly that in their own country. They are working very hard to reclaim the Yellow River, but they don't give a shit about the Kunar and the Nile.

[Breccia]

In Trump's 4th of July rally, he said

Now we have tested almost 40 million people … by so doing, we show cases 99 percent of which are totally harmless

Well, time to turn to Politifact.

I’m trying to figure out where the president got that number. What I think happened is that someone told him that the general mortality is about 1 percent. And he interpreted, therefore, that 99 percent is not a problem, when that’s obviously not the case.

Well, there you have it. Yet another ruling of --

"That was Fauci."

What?

"That wasn't PolitiFact. It was Dr. Fauci who said that."

So, what you're saying is, yet another member of Trump's administration is trying to work around and/or excuse his ignorance?

"Sure looks that way. And even Trump's own CDC refers to this as a 'severe disease' and talks about the sheer number of hospitalizations, even those that aren't fatal. Not even talking about hospitals reaching capacity, meaning a COVID-19 case could technically kill an entirely unrelated person. Simply put, what Trump said was not just factually false, and not just stupid, but legitimately dangerous."

- - - Updated - - -

For instance, we really need to do something about China's massive mining efforts in Central Asia and Africa. The are strip mining entire mountains, and dumping the mining chemicals directly into local rivers

Until recently, we had the moral authority to say "don't do that".

And, yet, here we are.

350 facilities skip reporting water pollution under temporary EPA rule

And that's over and above all the times Trump's EPA just didn't feel like doing their job before. See also: coal sludge.

- - - Updated - - -

Another Congress committee chair takes steps to protect whistleblowers, after Vindman's sudden retirement due to “bullying, intimidation and retaliation". But of course, you'd expect any House chair to --

"It's Rubio."

...what?

"It was Senator Rubio who said that."

Senate Intelligence Committee Acting Chairman Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the top Democrat on the panel, are vowing to protect whistleblowers in the intelligence community from retaliation.

Rubio and Warner on Friday said the Senate Intelligence Committee would continue to uphold the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, which prohibits reprisals against employees who make lawful disclosures of fraud, waste or abuse.

“Consistent with its mandate to oversee the activities and programs of the Intelligence Community, the Committee takes seriously all complaints it receives pursuant to the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA),” Rubio and Warner said in a joint statement.

The senators praised the whistleblower protection law as “an essential channel for ensuring evidence of wrongdoing rising to the level of an urgent concern is brought” to Congress’s attention.

“Without commenting on the specifics of any single instance, the American public can be assured that this Committee’s approach to ICWPA complaints is, and will remain, one defined by vigorous oversight, adherence to the law, and recognition of Congress’ Constitutional obligations,” the senators added.

"Trump has a public history of flat-out firing people who disagree with him, and attacks people in public all the time. It's no wonder morale is low, but firing people who report on fraud and corruption is Nixonian. Trump was impeached for that, and he hasn't slown down much. Blocking oversight is dictatorial. That's not supposed to be American."

- - - Updated - - -

When it rains, it pours.

I'd say "Guess the Speaker!" but instead I'll say Guess the Department!

If we all wore a mask, it would substantially mute the transmission of this disease and we would grow faster. We would have a lower unemployment rate. We'd grow faster. And would be far less likely to slow some of our reopenings

Incidentally, he said it on FOX News.

Robert Kaplan is head of the Dallas Federal Reserve.

- - - Updated - - -

In yet more evidence that Phase One is dead, China says it will retaliate against sanctions levied against it.

The sanctions relate specifically to human rights abuses for mass detention -- something Trump really doesn't have the moral authority to speak on, children in dog cages until they died and all. Still, Trump finds himself yet again in a position where he can do the right thing, or fulfill a campaign promise. It's increasingly obvious he can't do both.

[Thekri]

Still, Trump finds himself yet again in a position where he can do the right thing, or fulfill a campaign promise. It's increasingly obvious he can't do both.

He hasn't shown any interest in doing either for the last 74 years, so that doesn't seem like much of a dilemma. Neither promises or morals have any value to him.

[Breccia]

The Catholic Church got between $1.4 and $3.5 billion in PPP funds.

By the way, while Trump might have handed them the money, Congress allowed him to. If you object to taxpayer money going to religious sources, there's plenty of people you can blame for this one. To be fair, the church does pay people. But if other religious nonprofits were turned away or discriminated against, that's not Congress anymore -- that's the Executive Branch deciding who gets the money.

Seeing more and more why Trump hid the list in Mnuchkin-land.