![]() |
Russia and our election - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Russia and our election (/Thread-Russia-and-our-election) |
RE: Russia and our election - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 07-14-2017 (07-14-2017, 07:09 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: No, I'm not defending him...but rather I'm impugning the media. Promoting the "opposition research" defense means you're defending Trump. Quote:What evidence would you present that anything I claimed here is wrong? Bozo words don't prove that career staffers don't run anything (and, actually, it kind of makes my point). What bozo words would you present as evidence that career staffers run things as you claim? Please remember you have indicated you're not too lazy to get off your ass and do a 10 second Google search. So dazzle me. RE: Russia and our election - Belsnickel - 07-18-2017 Nothing like this show of strength:
from Russia, that is. Letting the world know that the US is going to allow espionage on its soil intended to sow chaos in its government. RE: Russia and our election - Belsnickel - 07-18-2017
RE: Russia and our election - TheLeonardLeap - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 01:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Nothing like this show of strength: Honestly, if Hillary won, would anyone even being talking about this? It's not Russia's fault that she neglected a couple states, thinking she was guaranteed them. It's not Russia's fault that she used the DNC to install herself as the candidate over Sanders. It's not Russia's fault Hillary actively alienated voters by calling them deplorables, while trotting out absurdly rich celebrity after absurdly rich celebrity talking about how they'll move to Canada if she loses. She was supposed to be the professional candidate, but she got sucked into attacking Trump more than presenting plans and stances on issues. Choose a better candidate, run a better campaign. Obama had just gotten 332 electoral votes (26 more than Trump) just 4 years earlier. 2016 Election by County: ![]() Now am I saying Russia is innocent? No. But don't pretend Russia is the one who made Hillary lose. She did a pretty darn good job of that herself. The hissy fit of losing after being so assured of victory is what has sown chaos in the government. RE: Russia and our election - Belsnickel - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 01:16 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Honestly, if Hillary won, would anyone even being talking about this? It's not Russia's fault that she neglected a couple states, thinking she was guaranteed them. It's not Russia's fault that she used the DNC to install herself as the candidate over Sanders. It's not Russia's fault Hillary actively alienated voters by calling them deplorables, while trotting out absurdly rich celebrity after absurdly rich celebrity talking about how they'll move to Canada if she loses. She was supposed to be the professional candidate, but she got sucked into attacking Trump more than presenting plans and stances on issues. Are you able to respond to my post instead of building a straw man? RE: Russia and our election - TheLeonardLeap - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 01:17 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Are you able to respond to my post instead of building a straw man? Fine. The fact that you are automatically calling it weak without knowing the terms of the deal is awfully iffy. It's not like "I sanction you!" has really ever accomplished a whole lot. Just look at NK. Sanction them and their people freeze and starve while their leadership (the people you're presumably trying to punish) are fat and making nukes. Now I am not holding my breath that anyone in charge in Russia will get heavily punished, because politics and justice sadly rarely seem to make a pair. That said, maybe Russia makes some big economic concessions as far as our exports to them or theirs to us, or just pays a large fine. Who knows. If it comes to be that they do make a deal and it's basically "My bad, tehehe" then sure, I will be with you calling that shit weaksauce. - - - - - - - - - - PS, I don't make Strawman, I only make Wickerman. So watch yoself. ![]() ![]() RE: Russia and our election - Belsnickel - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 01:47 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Fine. See? That wasn't so hard. ![]() Completely fair response. I freely admit that my jumping the gun on calling it weak is the result of my opinions of the administration over all, but it is also in addition into the continued denial on the part of the administration as to Russia's efforts to undermine our democracy and their established willingness to potentially lift sanctions imposed by the previous administration. This one deal could end up not being a portrayal of weakness on the part of our foreign policy, but the actions and statements from the current administration lead me to assume it will be. RE: Russia and our election - Dill - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 01:47 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Fine. Just a side comment here about the value of sanctions. North Korea is the exception which proves the rule, if anything, because nowhere in the world has any government such tight control over what its population thinks. Looking elsewhere, we see that sanctions ended Apartheid in South Africa. They also brought Iran to the table for the nuclear deal. Their threat offers some protection to the West Bank and in Gaza as well. In the case of Russia, the sanctions do have a powerful effect on Russia's economy and they help the pro-democratic forces there. That is why Putin is working so hard to get them lifted and reduce the US power to impose them with international support. RE: Russia and our election - TheLeonardLeap - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 04:43 PM)Dill Wrote: Just a side comment here about the value of sanctions. North Korea is the exception which proves the rule, if anything, because nowhere in the world has any government such tight control over what its population thinks. Okay, then how about Iran? Last I checked they were sanctioned and still testing their ballistic missiles, too... contrary to their agreement. In fact, the US has been sanctioning... -Iran since 1979 -North Korea since 1950 -Syria since 1986 (how's it going today, Syria?) -Sudan since 1993 -Cuba since 1962 I would argue none of those has accomplished anything. Except maybe for the fact all Cubans just drive around badass classic cars now because of it. RE: Russia and our election - Dill - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 01:16 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Honestly, if Hillary won, would anyone even being talking about this? It's not Russia's fault that she neglected a couple states, thinking she was guaranteed them. It's not Russia's fault that she used the DNC to install herself as the candidate over Sanders. It's not Russia's fault Hillary actively alienated voters by calling them deplorables, while trotting out absurdly rich celebrity after absurdly rich celebrity talking about how they'll move to Canada if she loses. She was supposed to be the professional candidate, but she got sucked into attacking Trump more than presenting plans and stances on issues. If we are talking about Russia because of suspected collusion between the Trump campaign and Putin, then no, we would not be talking about this if Hillary won. We would still be talking about the interference with the US election, however. Hillary would be taking strong steps to protect the US. Russia might have been in for a counter-cyber attack. She would not be working to return their property or proposing a joint task force to work with the Russians, letting right inside our policy and programs and institutions. The Trump strategy was largely to suppress the Hillary vote. I doubt she alienated many potential voters by calling half the Trump supporters "deplorables." She was the "professional candidate" as she proved in the debates. But Republican voters did not want professional. Even if all the things you accuse Hillary of were true, what really hurt her were two issues--the private email server and wikileaks. Could be a hack of the Trump campaign would have levelled the playing field, but that was not Putin's intent. As far a running a "better candidate"--I hear that often on news programs. Hillary was "flawed" we are told, despite being well prepared for the most important office in the land. But if professional and prepared do not seal the deal, while vulgar and ignorant carry the day, then it is hard to imagine what that better candidate would look like. RE: Russia and our election - Dill - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 04:57 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Okay, then how about Iran? Last I checked they were sanctioned and still testing their ballistic missiles, too... contrary to their agreement. Leonard, I partially agree with you on the ineffectiveness of sanctions. They aren't for every case. Your list above is rather heterogeneous. Sanctions aren't always aimed at regime change, and if they are and don't accomplish that end, they still may limit a bad government's power. So we shouldn't apply one measure of the effectiveness of sanctions in every case. The Cuban sanctions are an example of sanctions imposed for ideological reasons and impervious to assessment. I agree with you they not only have been a total failure, but may have strengthened and prolonged the Castro rule. I agree they have not effected regime change in NK, but they do curb that state's power. Same with Syria. Assad's ability to kill his own is greatly limited. Sanctions on Sudan have enabled the South to break away and become a separate country. When civil war between tribal factions broke out there, the threat of sanctions brought both sides to a cease fire. Sanctions have certainly weakened Sudan's ability to make war on its own people, though they have also ******** economic growth. The sanctions have undergone fine tuning since the '90s and more directly impact the ruling circle. Wait and see. I dispute that sanctions have not worked in Iran. In addition to bringing Iran to the negotiation table, they have brought the country a step closer to political liberalization. The partial removal of sanctions has ended (or at least paused) that country's efforts to become a nuclear power in the short term. The treaty does not forbid testing mid-range missiles. So I don't agree that sanctions in most of the above cases accomplished nothing. Regime change over the short term is rarely the actual goal anyway, so it should not be the measure of success. Since sanctions sometimes work well, sometimes partially, and sometimes not at all, then the conclusion I draw is not that we should not use them, but that we should do so judiciously. Listen to area experts who know the target countries economy and social institutions. Keep domestic politics at arm's length, if possible. Develop realistic metrics for deciding whether sanctions are working or not. RE: Russia and our election - GMDino - 07-18-2017 Is it possible they just lie out of habit? Or maybe they just don't care anymore? http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342589-ian-bremmer-trump-and-putin-held-second-informal-meeting-during-g-20?amp Quote:Trump, Putin had second, undisclosed talk at G-20 RE: Russia and our election - Dill - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 09:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: That Trump was not joined in the conversation by his own translator is a breach of national security protocol, ...though one that the president likely would not know about. Geezus. RE: Russia and our election - GMDino - 07-18-2017 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trumps-and-the-truth-1500332545 Quote:The Trumps and the Truth RE: Russia and our election - TheLeonardLeap - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 11:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trumps-and-the-truth-1500332545 Are you even reading the articles you post? Or are you just C&P'ing every negative Trump article you can find? You replied to me, then 2 minutes later posted a whole article. Then 3 minutes after that posted a whole different article, and I imagine there had to be at least SOME time in between finding each one. RE: Russia and our election - GMDino - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 11:06 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Are you even reading the articles you post? Or are you just C&P'ing every negative Trump article you can find? I was reading them earlier...didn't get around to posting immediately after reading. I found one article on one new site and the other on another. Each was opened in a separate tab in my browser. I read one and then the other. Didn't take very long to read them. When I came to the forum to post I saw your post and responded and then shared the two stories in their appropriate threads. I can provide certified letters with documentation on my browsing and posting habits if they are needed. ![]() RE: Russia and our election - Belsnickel - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 11:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: I was reading them earlier...didn't get around to posting immediately after reading. I found one article on one new site and the other on another. Each was opened in a separate tab in my browser. I read one and then the other. Didn't take very long to read them. I was going to say, I often post a link long after reading it. Sometimes it is so I can ponder it, mostly it's because I am on my phone and hate trying to post from this thing. RE: Russia and our election - TheLeonardLeap - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 11:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: I was reading them earlier...didn't get around to posting immediately after reading. I found one article on one new site and the other on another. Each was opened in a separate tab in my browser. I read one and then the other. Didn't take very long to read them. Last thing I want to see is your browser history. I know how you hardcore Democrat types are. You love your Donkey mascot. ![]() ![]() ![]() Yeah, I just had to ask because I was like "the hell, didn't he just post a full article a minute ago?" and checked to make sure I wasn't imagining things or got distracted and let some time slip by. RE: Russia and our election - GMDino - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 11:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I was going to say, I often post a link long after reading it. Sometimes it is so I can ponder it, mostly it's because I am on my phone and hate trying to post from this thing. And I might have three or four tabs open and until I get to it I post all the links at once. Now if I didn't so long to format them.... RE: Russia and our election - GMDino - 07-18-2017 (07-18-2017, 11:16 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Last thing I want to see is your browser history. I know how you hardcore Democrat types are. You love your Donkey mascot. ![]() ![]() |