Trump Dump: Foreign Policy (Thread I)

[The Romulan Republic]

Trump has announced that the US will not retaliate against Saudi Arabia for the murder of Kashoggi.

This is Trump effectively giving his dictator friends around the world the green light to murder American journalists. He is essentially outsourcing dictatorship.

In my opinion, Trump is personally culpable for all future political murders of journalists.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

Trump has announced that the US will not retaliate against Saudi Arabia for the murder of Kashoggi.

You don't say.

This is Trump effectively giving his dictator friends around the world the green light to murder American journalists. He is essentially outsourcing dictatorship.

America's love affair with dictators began way before Trump, and will continue long after he's gone, unless we Americans stop being selfish, dishonest assholes installing other selfish, dishonest assholes in positions of power, and wonder why our leaders are selfish, dishonest assholes.

But, yes, Trump is enabling strongmen the world over to do whatever to American journalists. Which also comes as no big shocker.

In my opinion, Trump is personally culpable for all future political murders of journalists.

He is And, we the people are just as guilty for enabling and empowering Trump, then wondering why all our chickens have come home to roost

[Ziggy Stardust]

To be honest, I personally believe that Trump is actually dumb enough to believe the Crown Prince's claims that he wasn't involved in the murder. That doesn't make the ramifications of this any less worse, but it seems entirely in line with Trump's character to be acting MORE out of ignorance than out of malice (on this specific issue ... clearly everything Trump does is informed by a healthy mixture of both).

[Elheru Aran]

In my opinion, Trump is personally culpable for all future political murders of journalists.

He is And, we the people are just as guilty for enabling and empowering Trump, then wondering why all our chickens have come home to roost

*hand up* Just a moment. I'm not saying Trump isn't the (more or less) democratically elected President or anything, but 'we the people' didn't elect him. A chunk of us voted, and then some mooks appointed by the states elected him.

Now those that are actually *enabling* Trump, are definitely a minority. The same white faces that show up to all his damn rallies and nod whenever Faux and Fools parrots his latest Tvomit. The fools in Congress proudly wearing a (R) after their names. The news media that duly reports what his latest atrocity is without saying 'yo guys this is janky'.

You may ascribe laxity and incompetence to the general population for not being more aware and more intelligent in the process of electing him President; however, here on the board at least, 'we' are, I think, quite aware of the situation.

[Gandalf]

*hand up* Just a moment. I'm not saying Trump isn't the (more or less) democratically elected President or anything, but 'we the people' didn't elect him. A chunk of us voted, and then some mooks appointed by the states elected him.

Have "we the people" ever elected a leader, by that rationale?

[Ralin]

Trump has announced that the US will not retaliate against Saudi Arabia for the murder of Kashoggi.

This is Trump effectively giving his dictator friends around the world the green light to murder American journalists. He is essentially outsourcing dictatorship.

In my opinion, Trump is personally culpable for all future political murders of journalists.

Here's a copy of the official statement: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-st ... di-arabia/

The world is a very dangerous place!

The country of Iran, as an example, is responsible for a bloody proxy war against Saudi Arabia in Yemen, trying to destabilize Iraq’s fragile attempt at democracy, supporting the terror group Hezbollah in Lebanon, propping up dictator Bashar Assad in Syria (who has killed millions of his own citizens), and much more. Likewise, the Iranians have killed many Americans and other innocent people throughout the Middle East. Iran states openly, and with great force, “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” Iran is considered “the world’s leading sponsor of terror.”

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia would gladly withdraw from Yemen if the Iranians would agree to leave. They would immediately provide desperately needed humanitarian assistance. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has agreed to spend billions of dollars in leading the fight against Radical Islamic Terrorism.

After my heavily negotiated trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Kingdom agreed to spend and invest $450 billion in the United States. This is a record amount of money. It will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, tremendous economic development, and much additional wealth for the United States. Of the $450 billion, $110 billion will be spent on the purchase of military equipment from Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and many other great U.S. defense contractors. If we foolishly cancel these contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries – and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!

The crime against Jamal Khashoggi was a terrible one, and one that our country does not condone. Indeed, we have taken strong action against those already known to have participated in the murder. After great independent research, we now know many details of this horrible crime. We have already sanctioned 17 Saudis known to have been involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, and the disposal of his body.

Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an “enemy of the state” and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that – this is an unacceptable and horrible crime. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder of Mr. Khashoggi. Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event – maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!

That being said, we may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran. The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region. It is our paramount goal to fully eliminate the threat of terrorism throughout the world!

I understand there are members of Congress who, for political or other reasons, would like to go in a different direction – and they are free to do so. I will consider whatever ideas are presented to me, but only if they are consistent with the absolute security and safety of America. After the United States, Saudi Arabia is the largest oil producing nation in the world. They have worked closely with us and have been very responsive to my requests to keeping oil prices at reasonable levels – so important for the world. As President of the United States I intend to ensure that, in a very dangerous world, America is pursuing its national interests and vigorously contesting countries that wish to do us harm. Very simply it is called America First!

Surprisingly enough, I actually don't greatly disagree with Trump's position on this. If the government of Saudi Arabia feels the need to whack one of their citizens for what was apparently years’ worth of anti-government propaganda and reporting that’s no more America’s concern than any number of executions in China or other countries. The fact that the guy executed lived in America for awhile and had a green card doesn’t entitle America to a say in what happens in Saudi Arabia or Turkey. Saudi Arabia is a powerful American ally and it isn’t in America’s interests economically or otherwise to alienate them over internal matters we probably couldn’t change anyway. Good call, Mister President.

Just think: this is the sort of thing Bush would have started a war over. The stopped clock turned out to be right this time.

[The Romulan Republic]

*hand up* Just a moment. I'm not saying Trump isn't the (more or less) democratically elected President or anything, but 'we the people' didn't elect him. A chunk of us voted, and then some mooks appointed by the states elected him.

Have "we the people" ever elected a leader, by that rationale?

One can question the moral and democratic, if sadly not the legal, legitimacy of any election where the EC overrules the popular vote, in my personal opinion. So, Trump and Bush II, in recent history.

Of course, America didn't have anything remotely resembling modern democracy until about sixty years ago. Before that, "we the people" largely meant "we the white people". And until about a hundred years ago, it meant "we the white men".

But its nonetheless fair to say that there is a lot of guilt to go around for letting things get to this point.

[The Romulan Republic]

Trump has announced that the US will not retaliate against Saudi Arabia for the murder of Kashoggi.

This is Trump effectively giving his dictator friends around the world the green light to murder American journalists. He is essentially outsourcing dictatorship.

In my opinion, Trump is personally culpable for all future political murders of journalists.

Here's a copy of the official statement: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-st ... di-arabia/

The world is a very dangerous place!

The country of Iran, as an example, is responsible for a bloody proxy war against Saudi Arabia in Yemen, trying to destabilize Iraq’s fragile attempt at democracy, supporting the terror group Hezbollah in Lebanon, propping up dictator Bashar Assad in Syria (who has killed millions of his own citizens), and much more. Likewise, the Iranians have killed many Americans and other innocent people throughout the Middle East. Iran states openly, and with great force, “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” Iran is considered “the world’s leading sponsor of terror.”

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia would gladly withdraw from Yemen if the Iranians would agree to leave. They would immediately provide desperately needed humanitarian assistance. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has agreed to spend billions of dollars in leading the fight against Radical Islamic Terrorism.

After my heavily negotiated trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Kingdom agreed to spend and invest $450 billion in the United States. This is a record amount of money. It will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, tremendous economic development, and much additional wealth for the United States. Of the $450 billion, $110 billion will be spent on the purchase of military equipment from Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and many other great U.S. defense contractors. If we foolishly cancel these contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries – and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!

The crime against Jamal Khashoggi was a terrible one, and one that our country does not condone. Indeed, we have taken strong action against those already known to have participated in the murder. After great independent research, we now know many details of this horrible crime. We have already sanctioned 17 Saudis known to have been involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, and the disposal of his body.

Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an “enemy of the state” and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that – this is an unacceptable and horrible crime. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder of Mr. Khashoggi. Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event – maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!

That being said, we may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran. The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region. It is our paramount goal to fully eliminate the threat of terrorism throughout the world!

I understand there are members of Congress who, for political or other reasons, would like to go in a different direction – and they are free to do so. I will consider whatever ideas are presented to me, but only if they are consistent with the absolute security and safety of America. After the United States, Saudi Arabia is the largest oil producing nation in the world. They have worked closely with us and have been very responsive to my requests to keeping oil prices at reasonable levels – so important for the world. As President of the United States I intend to ensure that, in a very dangerous world, America is pursuing its national interests and vigorously contesting countries that wish to do us harm. Very simply it is called America First!

Surprisingly enough, I actually don't greatly disagree with Trump's position on this. If the government of Saudi Arabia feels the need to whack one of their citizens for what was apparently years’ worth of anti-government propaganda and reporting that’s no more America’s concern than any number of executions in China or other countries. The fact that the guy executed lived in America for awhile and had a green card doesn’t entitle America to a say in what happens in Saudi Arabia or Turkey. Saudi Arabia is a powerful American ally and it isn’t in America’s interests economically or otherwise to alienate them over internal matters we probably couldn’t change anyway. Good call, Mister President.

Just think: this is the sort of thing Bush would have started a war over. The stopped clock turned out to be right this time.

It is disingenuous to frame this as a non-intervention/anti-imperialism issue. The choices are not "punish Saudi Arabia or stay out of it", because Trump is not a neutral party in this to begin with. We are already involved. Not simply because the man was a US resident, working for a US paper though that is certainly significant, but because Trump is actively propping up the Saudi regime. Its murders are fuelled by US money, and this murder and others like it are condoned and encouraged by the rhetoric of the US President, as part of his larger campaign to destroy the free press both abroad, an in America.

You are not arguing for non-intervention. You are using non-intervention to justify propping up the Saudi regime and actively abetting its crimes. If you really want America to be neutral, then you should be demanding that we stop selling the Saudis weapons, not applauding Der Fuhrer for refusing to do so.

In any case, Trump is personally culpable because he has already intervened- on behalf of the Saudi regime.

[Ralin]

It is disingenuous to frame this as a non-intervention/anti-imperialism issue. The choices are not "punish Saudi Arabia or stay out of it", because Trump is not a neutral party in this to begin with. We are already involved. Not simply because the man was a US resident, working for a US paper though that is certainly significant, but because Trump is actively propping up the Saudi regime.

You are not arguing for non-intervention. You are using non-intervention to justify propping up the Saudi regime and actively abetting its crimes. If you really want America to be neutral, then you should be demanding that we stop selling the Saudis weapons, not applauding Der Fuhrer for refusing to do so.

It's really amazing how many people seem convinced that trade are gifts that countries like America or the EU as a collective entity bestow as a reward instead a business deal between equals.

Tell me again why America should stop selling the Saudis weapons and how that would benefit the US?

Also

propping up the Saudi regime and actively abetting its crimes

‘regime’

Thanks for reminding us that only America-approved governments are legitimate, Dubya.

Its murders are fuelled by US money, and this murder and others like it are condoned and encouraged by the rhetoric of the US President, as part of his larger campaign to destroy the free press both abroad, an in America.

Please TRR, tell me more about how America is entitled to a say in how Saudi Arabia spends the money we pay them for oil and shit.

Also, murders? They killed the guy at their embassy. That’s an execution.

In any case, Trump is personally culpable because he has already intervened- on behalf of the Saudi regime.

Really? How? By not invading or sanctioning them?

[SCRawl]

Okay, I just can't let this one go:

Also, murders? They killed the guy at their embassy. That’s an execution.

Really? So Khashoggi had a fair trial, and was sentenced to death by a legitimate authority? Was it presided over by the guy with the bone saw?

Here's a tip: legal executions of a death sentence generally don't involve attempts to cover it up. If they wanted to put an end to their citizen, they should have held him at the consulate, transported him to Saudi Arabia, tried him, convicted him, and carried out the sentence there. Doing it the way they did was *at best* a way to get around Turkey's legitimate authority to extradite or not.

[Ralin]

Really? So Khashoggi had a fair trial, and was sentenced to death by a legitimate authority? Was it presided over by the guy with the bone saw?

No, yes, no. Apparently what happened was the crown prince ordered him killed. The crown prince in an absolute monarchy is fairly authoritative, so...

Here's a tip: legal executions of a death sentence generally don't involve attempts to cover it up. If they wanted to put an end to their citizen, they should have held him at the consulate, transported him to Saudi Arabia, tried him, convicted him, and carried out the sentence there. Doing it the way they did was *at best* a way to get around Turkey's legitimate authority to extradite or not.

I mean, they covered it up because it would have been a big thing in the news and a bunch of people would have complained and it's simpler to just head all that off by not making it public. Presumably they didn't extradite him for similar reasons and because it would have been more trouble than it was worth.

Why would they bother with a trial if the government had already decided to kill him anyway?

[The Romulan Republic]

Ralin, before this conversation goes any further, I expect you to apologize for insinuating that I support the invasion of Saudi Arabia. That is a ridiculous straw man and you know it, done to mask your morally-bankrupt support for totalitarianism as a principled stand against imperialism.

[Gandalf]

*hand up* Just a moment. I'm not saying Trump isn't the (more or less) democratically elected President or anything, but 'we the people' didn't elect him. A chunk of us voted, and then some mooks appointed by the states elected him.

Have "we the people" ever elected a leader, by that rationale?

One can question the moral and democratic, if sadly not the legal, legitimacy of any election where the EC overrules the popular vote, in my personal opinion. So, Trump and Bush II, in recent history.

Yeah, but the popular vote of a US presidential election is somewhat illusory. It's the byproduct of some 50 different smaller elections each with their own incentives and disincentives to vote. California Republicans and Wyoming Democrats (as examples) face similar issues in that their state isn't competitive, so why bother showing up since the other guy has a lock on it.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Have "we the people" ever elected a leader, by that rationale?

One can question the moral and democratic, if sadly not the legal, legitimacy of any election where the EC overrules the popular vote, in my personal opinion. So, Trump and Bush II, in recent history.

Yeah, but the popular vote of a US presidential election is somewhat illusory. It's the byproduct of some 50 different smaller elections each with their own incentives and disincentives to vote. California Republicans and Wyoming Democrats (as examples) face similar issues in that their state isn't competitive, so why bother showing up since the other guy has a lock on it.

Not always- Democratic candidate Beto O'Rourke only narrowly lost to Republican Ted Cruz in Texas of all places.

[SCRawl]

Really? So Khashoggi had a fair trial, and was sentenced to death by a legitimate authority? Was it presided over by the guy with the bone saw?

No, yes, no. Apparently what happened was the crown prince ordered him killed. The crown prince in an absolute monarchy is fairly authoritative, so...

Here's a tip: legal executions of a death sentence generally don't involve attempts to cover it up. If they wanted to put an end to their citizen, they should have held him at the consulate, transported him to Saudi Arabia, tried him, convicted him, and carried out the sentence there. Doing it the way they did was *at best* a way to get around Turkey's legitimate authority to extradite or not.

I mean, they covered it up because it would have been a big thing in the news and a bunch of people would have complained and it's simpler to just head all that off by not making it public. Presumably they didn't extradite him for similar reasons and because it would have been more trouble than it was worth.

Why would they bother with a trial if the government had already decided to kill him anyway?

I'm genuinely unsure about whether or not you're being serious. I'll grant you that it's consistent (if loathsome) that a monarchy can decide to put a citizen to death based on the whim of the monarch. But the notion that other nations' concerns* should be set aside, and that objectionable actions should be covered up, for reasons of convenience and an excess of complaints is ludicrous on its face.

* I refer to (for example) Turkey's right not to extradite Mr. Khoshoggi if asked to do so, rather than snatching him from the consulate where he had every reasonable expectation of safety. If Saudi Arabia wanted to put him to death, I say again, he should have been arrested at the consulate and then negotiated for transport back to their country proper. A diplomatic mission is not the venue for carrying out extra-judicial death sentences.

[SCRawl]

Not always- Democratic candidate Beto O'Rourke only narrowly lost to Republican Ted Cruz in Texas of all places.

Texas is changing. As the size of the electorate goes up, states become more and more liberal, because the majority of the US is actually to the left of the Republican party. The GOP can combat this for a while by making it more difficult to vote and gerrymandering districts, but it won't last forever; demographics are not on their side.

[Gandalf]

Not always- Democratic candidate Beto O'Rourke only narrowly lost to Republican Ted Cruz in Texas of all places.

I fear a miscommunication has occurred, and for that I apologise. The problem with the nationwide popular vote that TRR cited is that it's a combined total of about fifty smaller elections. Those elections have their own unique circumstances which affect their totals. Effectively, one doesn't vote in a national election, but rather a state election. So while a Democrat in Wyoming may feel uncompetitive because of an inherent Republican advantage in their state, a voter from a battleground state doesn't necessarily have that affecting them. Similarly, state variations on early voting, distance voting, and race based suppression methods all change each state total. As a result, the national popular vote is a really messed up number unless you add a fuckton of qualifiers.

I'm not sure where your O'Rourke response feeds in to that.

[Elheru Aran]

There are legitimate questions about how precisely democratic the Electoral College system is, but honestly it *usually* reflects the popular vote so it doesn't usually come up a cropper. The fact is that before modern communications became a thing, the Electoral College made sense. Once we got to the point where election results could be collated nearly instantly across the nation, it became a different story.

That said... as I keep reiterating... it's long past time for Federal level election regulations. Having fifty-and-change (don't Puerto Rico and maybe some US territories get votes in some fashion?) different elections, for candidates and issues which may affect the entire nation, doesn't really make sense. Automatic voter registration would be an excellent start.

[The Romulan Republic]

Every reason for the EC is now obsolete. America now is not America in the 18th. Century. And the EC fails in its ostensible purposes of preventing the unwashed masses from electing a demagogue (obviously, seeing as it picked a demagogue against the popular vote), and of protecting the interests of smaller states (it favours swing states, not small states- a Wyoming or Vermont vote for President, for example, is all but worthless under the EC). It serves only one real purpose- tilting elections in favour of Republicans. Twice it has picked a President against the will of the people in the last twenty years. Whatever purpose it once served, it is utterly broken now. If I could pass one Constitutional Amendment tomorrow, it would probably be a repeal of the EC.

As to the territories, I believe Puerto Rico does not get a vote in Federal elections, although the parties (or at least the Democrats-not sure about the Republicans) hold primaries there. Ditto the other territories, I believe. This is based on a set of old court rulings which literally described them as inhabited by "alien races" incapable of understanding "Anglo-Saxon values". Yeah.

I should probably re-link the John Oliver video on it. It was very good.

DC gets a Congressional rep.- but she doesn't actually get to vote. DC does get to vote for President.

And yes, a standardized set of Federal election laws is an excellent idea- but the flip side is... do you really want the current administration, which is more or less openly dedicated to the creation of a one-party state, to write them?

[Gandalf]

There are legitimate questions about how precisely democratic the Electoral College system is, but honestly it *usually* reflects the popular vote so it doesn't usually come up a cropper.

Considering the "popular vote" you cite is an artificial product of fifty odd elections with their totals all added together, using it as a gauge of the EC's democratic value seems flawed.

[Ziggy Stardust]

It's really amazing how many people seem convinced that trade are gifts that countries like America or the EU as a collective entity bestow as a reward instead a business deal between equals.

Um ... are you joking? Or are you actually ignorant of the fact that international arms deals have been a political/diplomatic tool for decades (generally for the purpose of cloaking proxy military actions under the guise of "soft power"), and indeed has even been considered such deals at times to be a casus belli? Hell, the stated purpose of the arms deal with the Saudis is specifically as a means of countering Iranian influence in the region. It's silly to point at something the entire international diplomatic community recognizes specifically as a form of intervention, and wave it a way as just a "business deal." That's not the way it works. It's not the way it has EVER worked, for fuck's sake. It's like saying Lend Lease was an apolitical business dealing that had nothing to do with the Nazis. Stop being a twat.

[The Romulan Republic]

Not always- Democratic candidate Beto O'Rourke only narrowly lost to Republican Ted Cruz in Texas of all places.

Texas is changing. As the size of the electorate goes up, states become more and more liberal, because the majority of the US is actually to the left of the Republican party. The GOP can combat this for a while by making it more difficult to vote and gerrymandering districts, but it won't last forever; demographics are not on their side.

If we had fair elections, they'd have probably been getting curb-stomped fairly consistently since at least 2000. They're utterly dependent on the old white bigot base at this point, and they've only held on this long by blatantly rigging the game.

Edit: Simply put, the path the Republican Party has put itself on since the Southern Strategy means that their survival as a party, and the survival of democracy, are mutually incompatible goals. Which pretty much explains where we are as a country today.

[Elfdart]

The way the Saudis have Uncle Sam's pecker in the pockets, MBS could have had Donald Trump Jr dismembered and US policy regarding Saudi Arabia wouldn't change. It isn't just the oil: the House of Saud could wreck the world economy by announcing they're withdrawing from American and European banks.

[The Romulan Republic]

The way the Saudis have Uncle Sam's pecker in the pockets, MBS could have had Donald Trump Jr dismembered and US policy regarding Saudi Arabia wouldn't change. It isn't just the oil: the House of Saud could wreck the world economy by announcing they're withdrawing from American and European banks.

Actually, being serious for a moment, an attack on Trump or his family probably might elicit a vastly excessive response. Trump is a mob boss. He doesn't give a shit about human rights, but touch the family and there'll be hell to pay. Consequences be damned- Trump wouldn't lift a finger for a murdered journalist, but he might burn the world to avenge a perceived slight against himself.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

Might? He went bankrupt four times, because Merv Griffin slighted him some years before that.