Trumps UN Speech - I Think He Did A Good Job... Telling It Like It Is


#61

As the lone superpower in the world, the United States is quite rogue itself. Do you have any idea how many countries the United States has conducted regime changes in? Do you know what country is the only nuclear power to have ever used nuclear weapons? And what the target was?


#62

I do not disagree. We would have a better world standing if we were a little more isolationist.


#63

Militarily and politically indeed. Trading with other nations, working with other nations on the various problems that are of threat, global hunger, management of the high seas in terms of fishing quotas, rendering aid during times of crisis like earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes, etc., etc., notwithstanding.


#64

Trump: “For the cost of resettling one refugee in the U.S. we can assist more than 10 in their home region.”

Me: “Or dispose of a few hundred thousands of them.”


#65

And Eisenhower said this:

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.

Yet America still spends magnitudes more then the next closest country on building machinery for war while our infrastructure is still getting a D on our report card in all 14 categories.


#66

I like Ike.

My preference would be that we spend our tax dollars on infrastructure. That was one of my “must haves” when I voted for President Trump.

I do think that if someone threatens the US, no matter where they are on Earth, we need reach out and give then a sharp crack on the mouth. A few MOABs on Kim’s palace in Pyongyang would do it. We already own the MOABs, and the planes deliver them. Not much extra cost involved in that. No instant death for muh 25 million civilians either.


#67

Well it remains to be seen whether or not Donald Trump improves the general lot of our infrastructure. But as to the DPRK, they are no threat to the United States.


#68

I’d put it on par with Reagan’s “Evil Empire” speech. Been that long since an American president so boldly described our enemies, made the case for their wickedness, explained the stakes, and announced their inevitable demise.


#69

Oh dear lord…:flushed:


#70

I wish we could equally say that about all the innuendo and speculation that has been going on for months over little more than someones dislike for this president…


Stupid California Lawmakers Approve Anti-American 'Sanctuary State' Bill
#71

I thought you were a self professed atheist… whats with the language?


#72

You make a couple of salient points that we can actually agree on… the solution however might be elusive as we see the world in quite different ways.

I am glad that you acknowledge the ‘war economy’ mentality that has grown up within US institutions going back to WWI. It was in fact Wilson who created the war economy culture of federal control over both economic and social structures in the US… up to and including beating people who disagreed with him. You and I will no doubt disagree on the definition of a ‘war economy’ or exactly what constitutes its nature and implementation. Shrug.

The ‘war economy’ was in fact the methods used by Wilson to exact federal control over not only the nature of commerce and war production in the US but the social order as well. When the war ended Wilson attempted to keep many of his policies in place and received much pushback against his steadfast belief in the living constitution in which originalism played no part in his ability to wield executive power.

What occurred after that and the imbalalances that lead to the great depression are still argued but lingering effects of Wilsons almost total control over the economy is quite suspect as a mitigating set of policies .

FDR emulated Wilson after his failed attempt to resurrect the economy with his New Deal policies. This is one thing I find most interesting about the conversation around what ended the depression. Some people of course will point to the New Deal even though unemployment up to 1940 never dropped into single digits and of course some will point to the war. The theory goes that the war spurred factory production, raised employment etc etc… If course FDR understood the fallacy between the need for a perpetual war machine and the stated objective of institutions like the failed League of Nations in advocating world peace… and of course the crushing debt accumulated to finance the war, but at the end of the war he and his people were terrified of double digit unemployment and that the war had only postponed the issue of recovery.

Because of the war need, most of the New Deal policies were rolled back but he saw the need to reinstitute the second bill of rights. FDR died but Truman was right there to pick up the spending programs of his predecessor. Problem was… he didn’t have any New Deal success to point to and objections to it by a majority of congress, scuttled most of those plans…

As Robert Taft said of why he voted against those policies “The problem now is to get production and employment. If we can get production, prices will come down by themselves to the lowest point justified by increased costs. If we hold prices at a point where no one can make a profit, there will be no expansion of existing industry and no new industry in that field.”Of course these are free market concepts that escape most in the discussion of prosperity and wealth creation.

Robert Wason, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, simply said, “The problem of our domestic economy is the recovery of our freedom.”

These ‘freedoms’ had been under constant assault since Wilson… Again, society pushed back against over zealot federal meddling… congress cut taxes and the economy recovered in rather grand fashion. Even with the tax cuts in 1946 they were still at 86% and were the only cut since the 1920’s.

As Sears, Roebuck and Company Chairman Robert E. Wood observed, after the war “we were warned by private sources that a serious recession was impending. . . . I have never believed that any depression was in store for us.”

With freer markets, balanced budgets, and lower taxes, Wood was right. Unemployment was only 3.9 percent in 1946, and it remained at roughly that level during most of the next decade. The Great Depression was over. The economy didn’t collapse after the war because checked spending, fiscal discipline and a tax policy encouraged entrepreneurship.

Of course some in the US never quite got over the idea that WWII ended the depression… and of course many others still don’t believe that high taxes and New Deal policies killed any hope of a recovery before the war.

By the end of the Truman administration the ‘war economy’ was well and truly ingrained… it was in fact a major nemesis of Eisenhower… Eisenhower was in fact a pragmatist when it came to fiscal responsibility and the war debt, while he wanted to cut taxes he said that it was a necessity to maintain tight spending by the government and high taxes until federal debt was dispensed with.

Of course liberals took that his lack of cutting taxes was a republican endorsement of high taxes, what he actually said was: “ What I have said is, reduction of taxes is a very necessary objective of government–that if our form of economy is to endure, we must not forget private incentives and initiative and the production that comes from it. Therefore, the objective of tax reduction is an absolutely essential one, and must be attained in its proper order.”

Unfortunately the mystique of JFK changed all of that…

Kennedy after all was the first president to actually cut taxes in an effort to restore his popularity after he picked a fight with US steel which saw the beginning of the end of Steel production in the US…

LBJ of course had other ideas and he leveraged Kennedy’s after assassination popularity to his own agenda… After all… How many times have you heard some politician say…”I want to be just like JFK … how many times, if any, have you ever heard someone say “I want to be just like LBJ”?

And onwards and upwards with the Great Society and the Vietnam War… and we have, either socially or economically been at war every since… Any attempt to kill the MIC or the central bankers they sleep with died with Eisenhower’s admonishments.

Just a brief history of the creation and attachment to the ‘war economy’ and the people who created it and perpetuate it… IMHO


#73

A lot of people are focused on what Trump said about North Korea and Iran. I say who cares. His speech was a direct attack against the NWO and open border globalists. He literally brought the fight to them, in their house, that America built for them.

The nation state remains the best vehicle for elevating the human condition.

Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent nations that embrace their sovereignty, to promote security, prosperity, and peace, for themselves and for the world.

Strong sovereign nations allow individuals to flourish in the fullness of the life intended by God.

We can no longer be taken advantage of or enter into a one-sided deal where the United States gets nothing in return. As long as I hold this office, I will defend America’s interests above all else, but in fulfilling our obligations to our nations, we also realize that it’s in everyone’s interests to seek the future where all nations can be sovereign, prosperous, and secure.

For too long the American people were told that mammoth, multinational trade deals, unaccountable international tribunals, and powerful global bureaucracies were the best way to promote their success. But as those promises flowed, millions of jobs vanished and thousands of factories disappeared. Others gamed the system and broke the rules, and our great middle class, once the bedrock of American prosperity, was forgotten and left behind, but they are forgotten no more and they will never be forgotten again.

Now we are calling for a GREAT REAWAKENING OF NATIONS, for the revival of their spirits, their pride, their people, and their patriotism.

Our hope is a world of proud, independent nations that embrace their duties, seek friendship, respect others, and make common cause in the greatest shared interest of all: a future of dignity and peace for the people of this wonderful Earth.


#74

Well, if you’re afraid of globalization I suppose you’re not interested in what trump said about North Korea and Iran. But if the thought of nuclear war is a bit depressing to you than you probably care a whole lot about what the pres said to/about the DPRK and Iran.


#75

Their is no mistake… He did in fact make a direct threat to the leadership of North Korea.

His words were

“The United States is a nation of great strength and patience BUT IF IT IS FORCED to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.”

Now some use words like glass or yourself using nuclear war, amplify the threat… That is not what he said. Now, he ‘appears’ to be of a similar mind to me and a lot of other people that we should not be engaged in pissy fights all over the globe but IF you find yourself in the position of having to use your military… you use it to bring your adversary to their knees…

Of course similar language was used to describe post war Germany… 'totally destroyed, ‘cities incinerated’ and ‘infrastructure decimated’… and while you arm wave about the entire 25 million population of NKorea… their still seemed to be a lot of Germans around to rebuild that country… after it was ‘totally destroyed’

It is time to end the Vietnam and the Iraqs and the Libyas… But if we do have to put our people out there… we should allow them to do their job quickly and efficiently but with an ear wide open to the total surrender and capitulation of our adversary… and I am sad to say, war kills innocent people… its time for people to take control of their governments… if they weren’t so brainwashed the people of NKorea could do just that…


#76

How about them republicans still clinging to their phobias. Perhaps instead of being scared of the small things people should concern themselves with things that really are chief among the threats to American survival.


#77

Funny how Huckabee Sanders tried to make the case that Obama had also threatened North Korea with total destruction. :lying_face:

This is what Obama actually said, which actually is quite responsible.

“It’s not something that lends itself to an easy solution," Mr. Obama said. “We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals. But aside from the humanitarian costs of that, they are right next door to our vital ally, Republic of Korea.”

Telling that the partisan right is letting HS get away with that deception.


#78

If that was pointed at little old me… that was a good slight of hand…


#79

A conservative perspective that’s not subjective!!!

Daniel Larison in The American Conservative:

“U.S. foreign policy already suffers from far too much self-congratulation and excessive confidence in our own righteousness, so it was alarming to hear Trump speak in such stark, fanatical terms about international affairs.”


#80

Like I said, the republican party is drifting in the direction of a more nationalist ideal and then their are those who, in their own ‘self-congratulation and excessive confidence’ believe that they have the right to shove a globalist agenda down a free populations throat. At the end of the day, I see no problem with national sovereignty and mutual cooperation… frankly I use to love going to Italy… when it was Italy… I still love Japan, it has retained its character… and many of their values make them far more understanding of others… they just don’t want to take them home. The shock from statist and globalists who have worked hard to manipulate populations into cities and under unified government is predictable… how dare anyone object to their ‘self-congratulation and excessive confidence’ and actually get up on stage and say so… sounds pretty independent to me…