Trump Dump: Foreign Policy (Thread I)

[Tribble]

Just thought I'd mention that Trudeau met Trump today, not much happened apart from both reaffirming that Canada-US relations are solid. There you go.

[Crazedwraith]

Just thought I'd mention that Trudeau met Trump today, not much happened apart from both reaffirming that Canada-US relations are solid. There you go.

And apparently top story is Trudeau beatting Trump at the handshake... which is supposedly amazing for Canada.

[Thanas]

Again, what I've been trying to get at is, even in these pro-torture portrayals...* The ultimate objective is to prevent a terrorist attack that's actually going to happen. Or to avenge one that has already happened.

One cannot just assume that willingness to accept that translates instantly into willingness to commit brutalities and crimes in the name of a thing that has never happened. Or of a thing that was blatantly made up on the spot, along the lines of "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia." That people are willing to jump all the way to "the purpose of torture is torture," as opposed to "the purpose of all this torture is, we keep telling ourselves, to save lives."

German history shows that there is a very small step between those things Simon. Just look at the Reichtagsbrand and Schutzhaft.

[Tribble]

Just thought I'd mention that Trudeau met Trump today, not much happened apart from both reaffirming that Canada-US relations are solid. There you go.

And apparently top story is Trudeau beatting Trump at the handshake... which is supposedly amazing for Canada.

Well apparently we need something as Trudeau is kind of seen as kind of a rag-doll when it comes to foreign policy. You had things like Obama speaking for him on behalf of Canada, China's nickname for him being "little potato" etc.

Normally I'd say a handshake probably doesn't mean anything.... but it's Trump so who knows. He might have just prevented WW3.

[Coop D'etat]

Just thought I'd mention that Trudeau met Trump today, not much happened apart from both reaffirming that Canada-US relations are solid. There you go.

And apparently top story is Trudeau beatting Trump at the handshake... which is supposedly amazing for Canada.

Well apparently we need something as Trudeau is kind of seen as kind of a rag-doll when it comes to foreign policy. You had things like Obama speaking for him on behalf of Canada, China's nickname for him being "little potato" etc.

Normally I'd say a handshake probably doesn't mean anything.... but it's Trump so who knows. He might have just prevented WW3.

The handshake thing was in the spotlight due to the Trumps weird, stereotypical 80s business man power plays with handshakes, which resulted in the Japanese PM getting ragdolled. Hence it became symbolically important that the 45 year old famous for winning a boxing match demonstrate he's physically more powerful than the overweight 70 year old.

Beyond that, Trudeau's team managed to finese the Trump White House act like a normal Presidency for half a day, which appears to be no mean feat all things considered.

[Simon_Jester]

Again, what I've been trying to get at is, even in these pro-torture portrayals...* The ultimate objective is to prevent a terrorist attack that's actually going to happen. Or to avenge one that has already happened.

One cannot just assume that willingness to accept that translates instantly into willingness to commit brutalities and crimes in the name of a thing that has never happened. Or of a thing that was blatantly made up on the spot, along the lines of "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia." That people are willing to jump all the way to "the purpose of torture is torture," as opposed to "the purpose of all this torture is, we keep telling ourselves, to save lives."

German history shows that there is a very small step between those things Simon. Just look at the Reichtagsbrand and Schutzhaft.

The Reichstagsbrand was a real fire. There was a physical building that physically caught on fire. The fire itself actually happened, it was not made up.

Hitler may well have lied about who was responsible for it, and he certainly used it as a justification for massively unjust witchhunts and the imposition of a police state. None of that is in dispute.

But if you're making this analogy as a counter to my point, then you have completely, utterly missed my point.

My point is not "Americans cannot become fascist goons." I am painfully aware that with the right political pressures it will probably prove alarmingly easy to turn a significant number of American right-wingers into fascist goons. My point is not "terrorism can't be used as an excuse to turn Americans into fascist goons," likewise.

What I am trying to get across here is that even a fascist goon might not appreciate being told to avenge a terrorist attack that literally never happened, that is a complete and utter fabrication which corresponds to no physical event. People who would cheerfully become fascist goons when someone shouts "remember 9/11!" may balk at becoming fascist goons when someone shouts "remember the Bowling Green Massacre!"

[Dragon Angel]

I actually know someone* personally (at least one person, I may know more but haven't been in contact with them...) who just believes almost everything the Trump administration says at face value. No matter how much I convince her otherwise, or even if I give her facts before Trump and his crew give out their "alternative facts", she ends up siding with Trump anyway. Even knowing Trump has a habit of being ... dishonest. Even showing her empirical proof against Trump's lies. She still believes him ..... completely.

It's stupidity in the category of Too Dumb To Live, but it exists. She exists, and probably metric tons of others. They are primed and ready for the Inner Party to give them all the facts they need and will dedicate themselves to that no matter what reality tells them.

I can most definitely see masses of people really being this foolish, including robotic bootlicking yes men who will honestly believe there was a Bowling Green Massacre.

* All this said, it's anecdotal, so, one speck in an ocean of masses. But it's possible. Too possible.

[Tribble]

I actually know someone* personally (at least one person, I may know more but haven't been in contact with them...) who just believes almost everything the Trump administration says at face value. No matter how much I convince her otherwise, or even if I give her facts before Trump and his crew give out their "alternative facts", she ends up siding with Trump anyway. Even knowing Trump has a habit of being ... dishonest. Even showing her empirical proof against Trump's lies. She still believes him ..... completely.

It's stupidity in the category of Too Dumb To Live, but it exists. She exists, and probably metric tons of others. They are primed and ready for the Inner Party to give them all the facts they need and will dedicate themselves to that no matter what reality tells them.

I can most definitely see masses of people really being this foolish, including robotic bootlicking yes men who will honestly believe there was a Bowling Green Massacre.

* All this said, it's anecdotal, so, one speck in an ocean of masses. But it's possible. Too possible.

Weren't there studies which suggested that people make up their minds then rationalise it afterwards? The more you try to convince some people the more likely they are just going to dig in their heels - a lot people hate admitting that they are wrong.

[Simon_Jester]

I accept that such individuals exist.

Something I'm not sure I'll ever be able to communicate successfully is that whenever I talk about the political impacts of lies and nonsense and gibberish is that everything comes in a percentage basis.

You can surely get 10% of the population to believe whatever delusional trash you say, including "there was a terrorist massacre in Bowling Green carried out by refugees, and anyone who tells you otherwise is part of a media coverup." You can probably get 10% of the population to believe Elvis gave birth to an alien baby.

Not so easy to get 20% of the population to believe it. I have no doubt it's still possible, maybe even not that difficult with the power of the bully pulpit, which has taken on a horrible new meaning in this administration. But not quite so easy.

It's harder to get 30% of the population to believe it. Harder still to get 40%. Under anything like modern American political conditions, 50% is so hard that I strongly suspect it to be impossible. The best you can manage is a half-assed "it was a slip of the tongue, I didn't mean to say 'massacre' " retraction, which is still a retraction.
__________________

The anti-Trump said it best: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

The more frequent, transparent, and above all utterly unrelated to the facts the Trumpolini administration becomes in its attempts to fool people, the more dependent it will become on the support of that fraction of the people which is so easily confused that it can be duped into believing literally anything.

While this group can be a threat, the evidence suggests that they do not represent a majority of Americans, or even a large minority. Even people who voted for Trump do not uniformly and without exception believe everything he says, including the things that can be casually demonstrated false as opposed to merely being 'questionably true.' And Trump voters do not represent a majority of Americans.

Moreover, should the political struggle shift from one of words to one of deeds, having all your foot soldiers be easily confused people who are entirely ignorant of basic facts can backfire badly. Unless you have taken the precaution of actually organizing them under some kind of... whatever the opposite of a vanguard party is... they will tend to cause a lot of accidental harm to your own cause, out of sheer stupidity and ignorance.

[Thanas]

The Reichstagsbrand was a real fire. There was a physical building that physically caught on fire. The fire itself actually happened, it was not made up.

Which is why I explicitly mentioned Schutzhaft, which had no real reason behind it to be enacted.

What I am trying to get across here is that even a fascist goon might not appreciate being told to avenge a terrorist attack that literally never happened, that is a complete and utter fabrication which corresponds to no physical event. People who would cheerfully become fascist goons when someone shouts "remember 9/11!" may balk at becoming fascist goons when someone shouts "remember the Bowling Green Massacre!"

Fascist goons dont care, fascist leaners dont care about the truth either. I wish it were different but it is not. If the truth mattered for those people, Trump would never have been elected president. It is all about "us vs them".

[Simon_Jester]

This ties back into my previous post about how all things are percentages.

Some Trump voters will accept literally any lie so long as it serves "us" and speaks ill of "them."

However, the number of Trump voters who will do this is smaller than the total set of all Trump voters. And even if it constitutes an overwhelming majority of Trump voters, it is still merely an overwhelming majority of a group that is itself roughly 27% of the American population.

Is the situation dire and threatening? Yes. Doomed? No.

[K. A. Pital]

So, Trump and Israel: "not committed to a two-state solution".

The gift that keeps on giving!

[Ace Pace]

So, Trump and Israel: "not committed to a two-state solution".

The gift that keeps on giving!

The mere fact Trump is stupid enough to go off script in a press conference regarding IvP is hilarious.

[K. A. Pital]

When did the guy ever stick to the script?

[Tribble]

There's a script? I thought the papers and teleprompter were just for show.

[Thanas]

When did the guy ever stick to the script?

Well he just has to read......oh wait.

[Civil War Man]

So, Trump and Israel: "not committed to a two-state solution".

The gift that keeps on giving!

I think that particular part was lost in the shuffle when his answer to a question about how he would respond to the recent increase in antisemitic incidents in the US could be boiled down to, "Have I mentioned today how I totally won the election? Also, my daughter married a Jew."

[ray245]

Did Trump just told Netanyahu to stop building settlements in his face?

[Ace Pace]

Did Trump just told Netanyahu to stop building settlements in his face?

Yes, didn't stop 99% of the Israel right from celebrating.

[SpottedKitty]

I think that particular part was lost in the shuffle when his answer to a question about how he would respond to the recent increase in antisemitic incidents in the US could be boiled down to, "Have I mentioned today how I totally won the election? Also, my daughter married a Jew."

I'm not sure that one counts — has he ever said anything (that makes some sort of sense, anyway) that's actually an answer to the question he was asked?

[Flagg]

So, Trump and Israel: "not committed to a two-state solution".

The gift that keeps on giving!

I think that particular part was lost in the shuffle when his answer to a question about how he would respond to the recent increase in antisemitic incidents in the US could be boiled down to, "Have I mentioned today how I totally won the election? Also, my daughter married a Jew."

He talks about his daughter like she is a piece of meat. It's disturbing.

[General Zod]

So, Trump and Israel: "not committed to a two-state solution".

The gift that keeps on giving!

I think that particular part was lost in the shuffle when his answer to a question about how he would respond to the recent increase in antisemitic incidents in the US could be boiled down to, "Have I mentioned today how I totally won the election? Also, my daughter married a Jew."

He talks about his daughter like she is a piece of meat. It's disturbing.

I mean he called her a nice piece of ass on Howard Stern's show and said he'd fuck her if she wasn't his kid.

[Flagg]

I think that particular part was lost in the shuffle when his answer to a question about how he would respond to the recent increase in antisemitic incidents in the US could be boiled down to, "Have I mentioned today how I totally won the election? Also, my daughter married a Jew."

He talks about his daughter like she is a piece of meat. It's disturbing.

I mean he called her a nice piece of ass on Howard Stern's show and said he'd fuck her if she wasn't his kid.

Really, or was it babsboot?

[Flagg]

He talks about his daughter like she is a piece of meat. It's disturbing.

I mean he called her a nice piece of ass on Howard Stern's show and said he'd fuck her if she wasn't his kid.

Really, or was it babsboot?

Correction: Really, or was it babbabooey?

[FaxModem1]

Death and Taxes Magazine

Trump Organization granted trademark for ‘Trump Escorts’ in China
In News by Drew Salisbury / March 8, 2017
EMAIL
SHARE
TWEET
STUMBLE
President Trump Holds News Conference In East Room Of White House

The Trump Organization was granted trademarks for 38 businesses in China on Wednesday, including “spas, massage parlors, golf clubs, hotels, insurance, finance and real estate companies, retail shops, restaurants, bars, and private bodyguard and escort services,” according to the Telegraph. Yes, the president’s family business applied for, and received, a trademark for branded escort services in China. Happy International Women’s Day.

The trademarks were applied for back in April of 2016, around the same time the then-candidate frequently criticized China on the campaign trail for currency manipulation and inventing global warming. But Trump’s actually been trying, mostly unsuccessfully and with much frustration, to secure the rights to his name in the country for decades. Once he won the election, the president-elect suddenly started having better luck. In November, he was granted provisional approval to trademark his name for real estate services. In February, days after agreeing to recognize the “One China” policy, another court victory was announced. Those all cleared the way for Wednesday’s ruling on the Trump brand massage parlors and escort services.

Now, before you start looking up the cost of a Trump beej, know that these are, for the moment at least, purely defensive trademarks, meaning Trump has no plans to start an escort service in China — he just wants to make sure nobody else opens up one in his name. Still, this is something no president has likely ever had to do in the history of the United States. There’s also still plenty of reasons to raise an eyebrow or two over the trademarks. Experts say the sheer number of them that have been approved in this short amount of time isn’t exactly usual.

“For all these marks to sail through so quickly and cleanly, with no similar marks, no identical marks, no issues with specifications — boy, it’s weird,” said Dan Plane, a director at Simone IP Services, a Hong Kong intellectual property consultancy.

“A routine trademark, patent or copyright from a foreign government is likely not an unconstitutional emolument, but with so many trademarks being granted over such a short time period, the question arises as to whether there is an accommodation in at least some of them,” agreed Richard Painter, chief ethics lawyer under President Bush.

While the case can’t be made with complete certainty that Trump is leveraging the presidency to benefit his business in China, the speed with which he’s receiving court victories is yet another red flag that there might be some emoluments violations going on. We’ll see if Trump Escorts gets mentioned in the president’s upcoming lawsuit.

I figured this belonged in the foreign policy thread.