Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 10 Jun '17 22:38
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/07/saudi-arabia-donald-trump-qatar-conflict

    "Saudi Arabia stroked Trump's ego. Now he is doing their bidding with Qatar
    The Saudis understood from the start that Trump craved flattery and respect.
    The kingdom’s investment in wooing Trump is paying off."

    "Clearly, Saudi leaders are playing Trump, exploiting the grandiose reception
    they gave him last month after he decided to make the kingdom the first stop
    on his maiden foreign trip as president. By the end of his two-day visit,
    Trump had become Saudi Arabia’s cheerleader and he aligned US foreign
    policy with the kingdom’s vision of the Middle East."

    "The Saudis read Trump accurately from the time he took office – they
    understood that he craved flattery and respect. Arab leaders, especially
    the oil-rich monarchs, are used to flattery since they live with it every day.
    So the Saudis decided to give Trump an extravagant welcome, the kind
    of deference he would never get at home."

    "But with his criticism of Qatar, which is a longtime American ally and
    home to the largest US military base in the region, Trump is telling the
    Saudis that he will side with them in virtually every regional conflict.
    In Trump’s eyes, the Saudis can do no wrong.

    Trump is also undermining members of his own administration, who
    have tried to stick to the traditional US policy of avoiding publicly taking
    sides in the regional feuds among Arab allies in the Gulf."

    "Thanks to Trump’s carte blanche, Saudi Arabia has little incentive to change
    course before it can force its smaller neighbor ]Qatar] into submission."
  2. 11 Jun '17 05:41
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/07/saudi-arabia-donald-trump-qatar-conflict

    "Saudi Arabia stroked Trump's ego. Now he is doing their bidding with Qatar
    The Saudis understood from the start that Trump craved flattery and respect.
    The kingdom’s investment in wooing Trump is paying off."

    "Clearly, Saudi leaders are playing Trump, e ...[text shortened]... incentive to change
    course before it can force its smaller neighbor ]Qatar] into submission."
    Nowadays we cannot trust any messages from USA.
    On one hand we have Twitters from Trump and his family.
    On the other hand we have messages from Pentagon, FBI, and other official sources.
    When they disagree, we know that USA cannot be represented from anywhere.
    Who would we believe? USA is in chaos.
  3. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    11 Jun '17 08:13
    5 years to sort it out before FIFA World Cup
  4. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    11 Jun '17 10:06
    Well Trump the chump seems to be excelling himself here. At what point will he actually go to war against - the USA? [Qatar is actually the home of a huge US military base, btw. ]

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-qatar-crisis-and-trumps-dangerous-embrace-of-the-saudis/

    The Saudis and their allies are actively undermining U.S. policies in the region, and the president congratulates them on their good work. They single out Qatar to settle scores with them over other issues, but dress up the score-settling as counter-terrorism and Trump believes it without question. The trouble isn’t just that he doesn’t grasp the trade-off being made, but that he actually thinks the U.S. is benefiting greatly from the Saudi-led bloc’s self-serving adventurism. Like many other hawks who conflate U.S. interests and those of bad regional clients, Trump can’t perceive the trade-off being made because he refuses to see the divergence of interests clearly on display.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Jun '17 15:15
    Originally posted by finnegan
    Well Trump the chump seems to be excelling himself here. At what point will he actually go to war against - the USA? [Qatar is actually the home of a huge US military base, btw. ]

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-qatar-crisis-and-trumps-dangerous-embrace-of-the-saudis/

    The Saudis and their allies are actively undermining U.S. ...[text shortened]... off being made because he refuses to see the divergence of interests clearly on display.
    Trump's companies have all sorts of business with the Saudis; they recently paid one of his hotels $270,000 for a lavish event in DC. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/05/saudi-payments-to-hotel-owned-by-president-trump/102536764/

    Additionally, they treated Trump like a king on his recent visit there.

    Appealing to the Donald's greed and vanity is an almost certain way to get him to jump through whatever hoop you desire.
  6. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    11 Jun '17 15:52
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Appealing to the Donald's greed and vanity is an almost certain way to get him to jump through whatever hoop you desire.
    A playbook for Dems when he avoids (or survives) impeachment. But I doubt they can stomach it.
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Jun '17 16:01
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    A playbook for Dems when he avoids (or survives) impeachment. But I doubt they can stomach it.
    I suggested here they try it back in November. There were some comments made by various Democratic officials in line with such an approach, but it doesn't seem to have been seriously tried. Whether it might have worked is a moot point now.
  8. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    11 Jun '17 16:03
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I suggested here they try it back in November. There were some comments made by various Democratic officials in line with such an approach, but it doesn't seem to have been seriously tried. Whether it might have worked is a moot point now.
    We could have had single payer by now!
  9. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Jun '17 16:18
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    We could have had single payer by now!
    If the DNC started staying in his hotels and giving him receptions where he was treated like royalty, maybe.
  10. 11 Jun '17 17:45
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Appealing to the Donald's greed and vanity is an almost certain way to get him to jump through whatever hoop you desire.
    To what extent does Donald Trump really have free reign and stumble around like a bumbling fool and to what extent are the decisions backed by other people close to him? Is his stance on Saudi Arabia merely about his vanity or is there more too it behind the scenes?
    And if it IS merely about his vanity, why is the blame all placed on him and not also on all those propping him up and allowing the clown show to continue?
  11. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Jun '17 17:52
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    To what extent does Donald Trump really have free reign and stumble around like a bumbling fool and to what extent are the decisions backed by other people close to him? Is his stance on Saudi Arabia merely about his vanity or is there more too it behind the scenes?
    And if it IS merely about his vanity, why is the blame all placed on him and not also on all those propping him up and allowing the clown show to continue?
    He is the President and the President is in de facto charge of US foreign policy and in undisputed control of the Executive branch. The "people close to him" have no power to thwart his policy decisions (such as they are); they can only seek to change his troubled mind.

    Sp pretty much yes; he has free reign to stumble around like a blind fool in foreign affairs.
  12. 11 Jun '17 18:37 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    He is the President and the President is in de facto charge of US foreign policy and in undisputed control of the Executive branch. The "people close to him" have no power to thwart his policy decisions (such as they are); they can only seek to change his troubled mind.

    Sp pretty much yes; he has free reign to stumble around like a blind fool in foreign affairs.
    Well then it would seem to me that the US system is fundamentally flawed.

    Given that he has so much power, I still think that allowing the current status quo to continue should be blamed squarely on those that do have a say in whether or not it should continue. I would think that irrevocable harm to the country should be sufficient grounds for impeachment. So either:
    1. His party leaders do not think irrevocable harm is being done.
    2. They don't have the guts to stand up and do something.
    3. They actually want to let the harm continue for political reasons.

    But the way I see it, as long as the media and people in general continue to point and Trump and put all the blame on Trump, none of the republicans will move a muscle.
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Jun '17 19:24
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Well then it would seem to me that the US system is fundamentally flawed.

    Given that he has so much power, I still think that allowing the current status quo to continue should be blamed squarely on those that do have a say in whether or not it should continue. I would think that irrevocable harm to the country should be sufficient grounds for impeachm ...[text shortened]... e to point and Trump and put all the blame on Trump, none of the republicans will move a muscle.
    Being a crappy President isn't grounds for impeachment:

    The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

    US Constitution, Article II, Section 4.

    While the meaning of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" as far as the impeachments clause is a matter of considerable scholarly debate, merely following a foreign policy that in the opinion of some, many or most is causing "irrevocable harm" to the country doesn't seem to equal them.
  14. 11 Jun '17 20:20
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Being a crappy President isn't grounds for impeachment:
    Legally yes. But given the apparently far reaching powers granted to him, it should be.
  15. 11 Jun '17 20:52
    Originally posted by no1marauder to Twhitehead
    He is the President and the President is in de facto charge of US foreign policy and in undisputed control of the Executive branch. The "people close to him" have no power to thwart his policy decisions (such as they are); they can only seek to change his troubled mind.

    Sp pretty much yes; he has free reign to stumble around like a blind fool in foreign affairs.
    As a general expert on formal English usage, I always use 'free rein', not 'free reign'.

    "...he has free reign..."
    --No1Marauder

    http://grammarist.com/spelling/free-rein-free-reign/

    "Free rein vs. free reign

    The usual spelling of the phrase meaning freedom to do as one pleases is free rein, not free reign.
    The latter is a common misspelling, and it almost makes sense given reign‘s meaning
    (i.e., the exercise of sovereign power). But free rein, an allusion to horseback riding, is
    the original form, and it is much more common in published texts."

    "Instances of free reign are easily found, especially *where editors are absent*—for example..."

    Hence, 'free rein' is clearly preferred, if not required, in formal written English.
    'Free reign' apparently has crept into some popular usage, particularly on the internet,
    among more ignorant writers.