[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #508

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 16:01 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Niet door Trump geschreven, natuurlijk. Alsof hij zulke ingewikkelde woorden weet.

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 16:02 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Ik moet vooral lachen om het feit dat er even benadrukt moet worden dat Amerika echt veel stoerdere wapens heeft dan NK.

Ik bedoel: .

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 15:59 schreef SureD1 het volgende:

[..]

Verdomme, die muntjes hadden de bitcoin van 2018 kunnen worden!

quote:

My retired academic uncle in China recently sent me his views about how Trump is perceived in Beijing among Chinese trade and foreign policy officials.

The gist of his note is most of his peers think Trump is like a brash unschooled village chief from a backward province who's been elevated by cynical party elders to be a lightening rod that draws attention away from their own corruption.

Early expectations of Trump as a shrewd, practical business-man have given way to the realization that he's a thin-skinned stooge easily manipulated by his handlers who're busy harvesting their own corruption.

Chinese officials are in a quandary about who's really in charge while a parade of American poseurs traipse through Beijing claiming to be Trump's puppet masters. We saw this recently with Mnuchin openly feuding with Trump trade advisor Navarro while negotiating in Beijing.

Uncle says the elaborate Chinese response on trade -- including a seminar analyzing its position for American media and businesses -- was a ploy to see who's in charge, whose buck it is and where it stops.

The Chinese worry that Trump and his handlers are so inept, they'll sign a really bad deal just to look good and China will face more conflict down the road.

Obama impressed the Chinese with his dignity and stature as a leader and with his scholarly insights about China. They trusted Obama not to be stupid.

Uncle says Trump thinks he's a bull in a china shop but it's really an abattoir.

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 16:04 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Kolderiek dit weer

Waarom kunnen die mensen nou nooit eens normaal doen.

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 16:10 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Vroeger reageerde DeParo nog wel eens als het over Trump en Kim ging.

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 16:11 schreef SureD1 het volgende:

[..]

Wat heeft KJU aan tremendous anger en open hostility laten zien de afgelopen dagen, niks toch wat niet normaal is voor Noord Korea toch? Trekt zijn keutel ook nog in om een non-reden...

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 15:59 schreef nostra het volgende:

[..]

https://www.whitehouse.go(...)hairman-kim-jong-un/

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 16:13 schreef Szura het volgende:

[..]

Ze zeiden dat Bolton en Pence 'hun kop moesten houden' met dreigementen over dat Noord-Korea als Libië zou eindigen.

Trump on NFL Anthem Protests: If You Don’t Stand Maybe You Shouldn’t Be in the Country Fox & Friends

twitter:

RogerPielkeJr twitterde op donderdag 24-05-2018 om 15:48:45 "Anyone who attends an NFL game is struck by how militarised it has become. . . This is not patriotism: it is aggressive nationalism that is fast turning into a racially polarised version of it" @EdwardGLuce in @FT on NFL in American politics ?https://t.co/htFGEtkNBy reageer retweet

twitter:

gideonrachman twitterde op donderdag 24-05-2018 om 12:58:34 Sharp and disquieting analysis by @EdwardGLuce on Trump's swings between rage and conciliation on trade, Korea etc and how this destroys his and America's credibility https://t.co/s1TzA5WfyR via @financialtimes reageer retweet

quote:

The exorbitant cost of Trump’s America going it alone

Allies and adversaries are learning to sustain deals without the US

President Trump's approach to negotiation is evenly poised between conciliation and rage. There is rarely any in-between

Here is Donald Trump’s art of the self-harming deal. First, demand China eliminate its surplus with America, otherwise you will start a trade war. Second, ensure your negotiating team is divided and confused. Third, capitulate after China offers a few meaningless pledges — as the Trump administration did last weekend.

Next, discover in a rage that you have been hoodwinked. Finally, resume incendiary threats of a trade war.

Mr Trump has yet to take those last steps. But as night follows day, he will. It is Mr Trump’s basic dialectic — threats followed by conciliation followed by rage followed by threats. Wash, rinse and repeat.

He is following the same pattern with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. Last year Mr Trump threatened to wipe the country off the map. Then he discovered that “little rocket man” was honourable.

The White House even struck commemorative coins for next month’s planned summit in Singapore. Now Mr Trump is starting to suspect he may have been taken for a fool. Mr Kim may not want to denuclearise after all. Mr Trump is evenly poised between conciliation and rage. There is rarely any in-between.

What is the price of these wild mood swings? The instant cost is to weaken America’s leverage. With each fresh cycle, the administration’s threats are taken less seriously. It is all very well saying ZTE, one of China’s telecoms champions, is a serial violator of US law and will be banned. But if you follow up by tweeting that you now want to put ZTE back in business, your previous stance is devalued. By the time you revert to your brimstone rhetoric, as Mr Trump surely will, China will no longer be quite so worried. They know a paper tiger when they see one. The same applies to North Korea. Add in Iran’s response to America’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal. And Europe’s reaction to trade threats.

But there is a steeper cost to America, and to the world, that far outweighs Mr Trump’s immediate self-harm. It comes in two forms. The first is cumulative. The more the US thumbs its nose at the global system that it built, the harder it will be to repair. America’s allies still cling to the hope that Mr Trump is a one-off. Not only will he be replaced by a more conventional president but we need only wait for two and a half years before that happens.

Should Mr Trump win again in 2020, the global shock will far exceed his first victory. It would confirm what everyone fears — that America has made a lasting decision to walk away from the global order it created. We can already measure the difference after 18 months.

There was a time when a US president could pull the plug on the initiatives of others and they would wither. Think of the 1999 Kyoto protocol on global warming. Or the 1956 Anglo-French-Israeli invasion of Suez. The world had already evolved before Mr Trump came to office. His presidency is proof of concept. When Mr Trump withdrew America from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, as he did in his first week, the trade deal did not die. It is alive and well. The same applies to the Paris accord on climate change. My bet is that Europe and China will keep the Iran nuclear deal alive too. It is becoming a habit. Allies and adversaries alike are learning how to sustain deals without the US.

But the world must still reckon with Mr Trump’s wild mood swings. His tactics with China are a case in point. Next week Wilbur Ross, US commerce secretary, will try to hammer out a 21st century version of the barter deal. He will ask China to agree long-term contracts to buy American soyabeans, gas, steel and other commodities.

Were Mr Ross working for a different president, he would approach China alongside Europe and Japan, America’s main trading partners. They would collectively pressure China to carry out structural reforms. Instead, Mr Trump is threatening punitive sanctions against America’s allies. Meanwhile, China must commit to buying low value-added US goods at the expense of America’s trading partners. Economists call this “managed trade”. Non-economists call it a cry for help. It makes a mockery of the rules America created.

The second cost to Mr Trump’s dealmaking is the danger of conflict. There is always the fear he will become a hostage to his own words. In recent weeks he has been basking in coverage of his impending Nobel Prize for disarming North Korea. Now he is learning it was a terrible misunderstanding.

Mr Trump only has two modes. Will he pretend not to hear and meet Mr Kim anyway? Or will he revert to a game of nuclear chicken? The difference is not trivial.

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 15:54 schreef Ulx het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op donderdag 24 mei 2018 17:06 schreef Bernhard.von.Galen het volgende:

[..]

Is dit echt?

HAHAHA wat een fukking mongool.

quote:

Look, having nuclear-my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart-you know, if you're a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world-it's true!-but when you're a conservative Republican they try-oh, do they do a number-that's why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune-you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we're a little disadvantaged-but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me-it would have been so easy, and it's not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right-who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners-now it used to be three, now it's four-but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven't figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it's gonna take them about another 150 years"