[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #292

quote:

As Ullrich admirably demonstrates, it was not the inexorable rise of the Nazis but rather the first signs of their decline in the November 1932 elections (exhausted, bankrupt, and demoralized from constant campaigning without ultimate victory) that led conservative elites to accept Hitler’s demand for the chancellorship, before his stubborn holdout could ruin his own party and leave the conservatives to face the left without popular support. Many of Hitler’s and the conservatives’ goals overlapped: ending Weimar’s parliamentary democracy; rearming; throwing off the Versailles Treaty and restoring the borders of 1914; crushing the “Marxists” (i.e., Social Democrats and labor unions as well as Communists); and de-emancipating Germany’s Jews. The fundamental assumption of these conservative elites was, of course, that they would control Hitler and use him to realize their agenda, not vice versa.

[...]

Third, the assumption that conservative, traditionalist allies—however indispensable initially—will hold such upstart leaders in check is dangerously wishful thinking. If conservatives cannot gain power on their own without the partnership and popular support of such upstarts, their subsequent capacity to control these upstarts is dubious at best.

quote:

A president who for many months, both before he won the election and after, had been characterized as dangerously unstable by the people he calls the establishment, now witnessed the same establishment promote him to the ranks of the sane and responsible. What conclusion will be drawn by the mind of Donald Trump?

[...]

Go back a moment to the lesson that Trump is apt to learn from events of the past week. Would it be wrong to reduce it to the following? “You can make some highly respectable new friends by throwing missiles at an obnoxious foreign power. It works like a dream so long as you do it fast and give it a humanitarian gloss.” In the sheer quantity of the attention paid, and the narrowness of the attention, something terrible about our political culture has come to light. Consider The New York Times on Friday April 7. The morning edition featured no fewer than nineteen stories on the Syria missile strike, with headlines varied and supple: “Anguish Sways the Isolationist”; “A ‘Significant Blow’ to U.S. Ties, Putin Says”; “A One-Time Strike Aimed at Halting Use of Nerve Gas”; “63 Hours: From Sarin Attack to Missiles Falling”; “Trump Fires a Warning Shot in the Bannon-Kushner Battle”; “An Unexpected Change of Subject at an Elegant Diplomatic Dinner”; “Trump’s View of Syria: How it Evolved, in Tweets”; “Trump’s Decision Has Some Critics Cheering and Some Supporters Booing”; “GOP Lawmakers, Once Skeptical of Obama Plan to Strike Syria, Back Trump”; “Was Missile Attack on Syria Illegal? Explaining Presidential War Powers”; “Syrians Opposed to Assad Feel Sense of Satisfaction, but Also Fear Reprisals”; “Once Critical of President, Refugees Offer Approval”; “A Global Divide Over a Missile Attack”; “Missile Strike Signals a New Reality in Syria for Friends and Foes Alike”; “Measuring Action Against a Government Already Under Siege”; “Wasn’t Syria’s Stock of Chemical Weapons Destroyed? It’s Complicated”; “Asking If U.S. Remarks Helped Embolden Assad”; “Who Was in the Room With Him? Trump’s Advisers During the Strike”; “For Tillerson and McMaster, Action on Syria Is Chance to Step Out of the Shadows.”

The headlines are a shade less redundant than the stories themselves; but the words that inevitably stand out are attack, strike, decision, action, Syria, Syrians, and (most of all) Trump. Though a critical note is struck in some places, along with a decorous show of scruple concerning the balance between executive action and constitutional law (with law on the whole portrayed sympathetically), the overall message is never in doubt. The newspaper of record is telling a president whose legitimacy it has challenged ever since the election—a president who craves approval almost as much as he loves attention—“Now you have made yourself important in a good way.”

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 09:01 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
Welke storm verwacht je dan? Als het op Trump aankomt zie ik het altijd maar zo: geen nieuws is goed nieuws.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 11:43 schreef antiderivative het volgende:
Trump agenda vandaag:

* Intelligence briefings
* Holding a policy discussion on infrastructure and tax reform with the President's Strategy and Policy Forum
* Meeting with Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly
* Meeting with National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn
* Working dinner with senior military leaders

deelnemers, zoals altijd, aan de Strategy and Policy Forum:

Stephen Schwarzman (CEO of Blackstone and Chair of the President's Strategy and Policy Forum)
Doug McMillon (CEO of Wal-Mart)
Indra Nooyi (CEO of PepsiCo)
Mary Barra (CEO of General Motors)
Paul Atkins (CEO of Patomak Global Partners)
Elon Musk (CEO of Tesla/SpaceX)
Larry Fink (CEO of BlackRock)
Jamie Dimon (CEO of J.P. Morgan Chase)
Ginni Rometty (CEO of IBM)
Toby Cosgrove (CEO of Cleveland Clinics)
Jim McNerney (Fmr. Chairman, CEO of Boeing)
Jack Welch (Fmr. CEO of General Electric)
Rich Lesser (CEO of Boston Consulting Group)
Adebayo Ogunlesi (Chairman of Global Infrastructure Partners)
Mark Weinberger (CEO of Ernst & Young)
Daniel Yergin (Vice Chairman of IHS Markit)

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 09:43 schreef Maxerazzi het volgende:
Na al die overspannen Hitlervergelijkingen van het afgelopen jaar eens een zinnige en redelijk uitgebreide historische analyse ervan. Belangrijkste observatie mij betreft:

[..]

Overigens ook een goede analyse bij NYRB over hoe het gros van de Amerikaanse media (incl. New York Times) een debiel signaal afgeeft, Trump alleen maar wordt aangemoedigd tot meer militaire acties.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 11-04-2017 om 14:03:43 North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A. reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 14:59 schreef monkyyy het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 11-04-2017 om 14:03:43 North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A. reageer retweet

Ik ben benieuwd wat Trump in gedachten heeft. Oorlog? Of er zelf heen vliegen en een goed gesprek hebben met Kim.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 09:43 schreef Maxerazzi het volgende:
Na al die overspannen Hitlervergelijkingen van het afgelopen jaar eens een zinnige en redelijk uitgebreide historische analyse ervan. Belangrijkste observatie mij betreft:

[..]

Overigens ook een goede analyse bij NYRB over hoe het gros van de Amerikaanse media (incl. New York Times) een debiel signaal afgeeft, Trump alleen maar wordt aangemoedigd tot meer militaire acties.

[..]
The headlines are a shade less redundant than the stories themselves; but the words that inevitably stand out are attack, strike, decision, action, Syria, Syrians, and (most of all) Trump. Though a critical note is struck in some places, along with a decorous show of scruple concerning the balance between executive action and constitutional law (with law on the whole portrayed sympathetically), the overall message is never in doubt. The newspaper of record is telling a president whose legitimacy it has challenged ever since the election—a president who craves approval almost as much as he loves attention—“Now you have made yourself important in a good way.”

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 15:28 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:
Goed idee ja, oorlogje spelen met Noord Korea, omdat ja, waarom eigenlijk?

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 15:28 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:
Goed idee ja, oorlogje spelen met Noord Korea, omdat ja, waarom eigenlijk?

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 15:36 schreef SureD1 het volgende:

[..]

Het is dat Bannon redelijk buiten spel lijkt te staan anders zou je nog kunnen denken dat het is om de door hem zo gewenste apocalyptische eindtijd wat vroeger te doen arriveren....

Serieus? omdat hem dat - in zijn belevingswereld - yuge approval ratings op gaat leveren...

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 15:45 schreef vigen98 het volgende:
Maar dit was toch te voorzien? Er moest iets gebeuren met NK. Het kan niet langer doorgaan dat ze ongestoord nucleaire bommen kunnen ontwikkelen. Tijd om NK plat te gooien.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 11-04-2017 om 13:59:04 I explained to the President of China that a trade deal with the U.S. will be far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem! reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 15:49 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 11-04-2017 om 13:59:04 I explained to the President of China that a trade deal with the U.S. will be far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem! reageer retweet

Zou Xi hiervan onder de indruk zijn geweest?

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 april 2017 15:43 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:
Waar zijn eigenlijk die users gebleven die voor de verkiezingen zo hysterisch tekeer gingen over dat Clinton een 'warmonger' zou zijn en Trump de vrede zelve?