Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 222

Thread: Trump's 4th Of July Parade

  1. #61
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    That's not a reason, its an opinion. Besides didn't you say the "US military" ?
    Yes, I did. And I quoted a retired 4-star general. If you're looking for quotes from active-duty personnel, you're not going to find it, for obvious reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Twitter discussion i saw some where. That was the best reason.
    That's not a reason, its an opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    So that us today article chronicles the few times it happened. Ike did it for his inauguration, twice & JFK in '61, missiles included. I think i have seen this photo some where and figured this happened as a matter of course only to later find out it was an exception.
    I'm just going to quote you verbatim "But think about it, when have you ever had tanks and other stuff roll down streets for national day events ? never happened has it. Why."

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    You're still scratching that surface here. An outstretched arm with open palm has a fascist connotation after WW2. Are you making a connection between the two.
    Scratching the surface? How am I scratching the surface?

    Yes, I am absolutely making a connection between the two. Something we used to do in the past was corrupted by dictatorial assholes and thus we don't hardly do it anymore. The Desert Storm parade was pretty unique in the past 60+ years and hasn't been repeated since.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I find that amazing. Relations must have been strained for very long if that was the case. Which makes this whole "special relationship" thing very recent. Only since WW2.
    Yes, that is all correct. I don't think that strained relationships was the cause for a royal visit being delayed until Roosevelt's time in office, so much as you couldn't just hop on a 747 and jet off to another hemisphere back then.

    As for the "special relationship" being "recent", only since WW2....um, yeah, that is literally the case. When did you think it originated?
    TwentyFiveFortyFive

  2. #62
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    You are seeing Trump as an aberration. What if he is a transitionary figure. Meaning those coming after are going to retain a good part of his core beliefs if having a different style.
    Correction: I am hoping that Trump is an aberration. I am hoping that those coming after him do not retain a good part of his core beliefs: Kleptocracy. Nepotism. Authoritarianism. Nationalism. Racism.

    This is what angers me the most about Trump: He is normalizing these things to a degree not seen in decades.

    For example, in this country, a corrupt politician that accepts bribes, even a war hero, gets thrown in prison.

    Trump on the other hand, successfully stonewalls and obstructs any investigate having to do with him. This sets a hideous precedent. Not that the Kool-Aid drinkers care much about it...
    TwentyFiveFortyFive

  3. #63
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,063
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Yes, I am absolutely making a connection between the two. Something we used to do in the past was corrupted by dictatorial assholes and thus we don't hardly do it anymore. The Desert Storm parade was pretty unique in the past 60+ years and hasn't been repeated since.
    There are other things we're doing in this country, domestically, that really took off Bush 43's first term, that to me are straight out of the playbook of the Stasi and KGB. And that we ought to really stop doing it. We need to re-take the moral high ground and not turn into our adversaries.

    The combination of this apparatus, the creation of which precedes Trump, with a person like Trump having the potential and willingness to wield it in even worse ways, is troubling to me. I'm glad to be in the private sector, stay politically disengaged, disengage from an increasingly polarized and fractious civil society, with my fingers in my ears, singing "la-la-la-la-la".

    I don't want to touch these problems or act politically in any way, not even with the lightest touch using a 39-and-a-half foot pole.

    Full awareness and full avoidance is my MO.
    Last edited by Ironduke; 06 Jul 19, at 01:09. Reason: typo
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  4. #64
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,311
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironduke View Post
    I have a more nuanced view of the "special relationship". That it was a simply a transitional period that saw the transfer of imperial power from London to DC. We assumed much, but not all of the British Empire's responsibilities, and in other areas extended the Empire's hegemony into areas that Britain would have liked to hegemonize, but was incapable of, e.g. half of Europe.

    In areas where we lacked the knowledge and experience to extend influence and hegemony, we were able lean on London and tap into their vast knowledge, experience, and expertise, which they more or less freely provided to us as part of this "special" arrangement.

    That being said, I think the world on the balance is better off that this system has prevailed as long as it has, especially compared to the alternative of Soviet, Chinese, communist, or fascist hegemony. In my opinion, in the face of these much worse alternatives, London willingly surrendered its hegemony to Washington, and that Washington willingly assumed hegemony from London, being equally aware of the much worse alternatives the world faced.

    Given London's weakness and Washington's strengths, and the perils the world faced, this was the only viable path forward to maintain some semblance of the existing world order, Pax Britannica, etc.

    Both governments went into this eyes wide-open, but the citizenry of each country did not necessarily fully understand what was going on, and many of those who did had profound disagreements with it, which led to some troubles at home in each country at times.

    I see broad parallels in some ways with this to what happened with the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves, when the Portuguese Empire was based out of Rio de Janeiro from 1808-21. The differences coming afterward, whereas Portugal and Brazil bifurcated and became independent entities.

    Britain and the US bifurcated earlier, in the 1780s, and merged back together in the 1940s. There was then a transitional period in which the transfer of power began. The transfer of the seat of empire, and the roles of the US and UK assumed since, has been more enduring and stands in stark contrast to the Portuguese example.
    Like : )

  5. #65
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,311
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Yes, I did. And I quoted a retired 4-star general. If you're looking for quotes from active-duty personnel, you're not going to find it, for obvious reasons.
    No, if you say US military i'm thinking something from the Pentagon. More visible opposition than a retired general.


    I'm just going to quote you verbatim "But think about it, when have you ever had tanks and other stuff roll down streets for national day events ? never happened has it. Why."
    Why it does not happen more often is the question ? its seems more the exception than the norm. If i got the count right, it has only happened five times since WW2.

    Yes, I am absolutely making a connection between the two. Something we used to do in the past was corrupted by dictatorial assholes and thus we don't hardly do it anymore. The Desert Storm parade was pretty unique in the past 60+ years and hasn't been repeated since.
    Oh! you see a display of military hardware in a parade as a symbol of authoritarianism. The commies & fascists did it so we must refrain.

    I've not seen it this way during our republic day parades where its a display of national strength. This is getting cultural now.

    I found it amusing in one of those articles that some one said people must not panic if they saw tanks rolling down the street. Maybe in Europe this might be relevant but in the US, who else can those tanks belong to. lol. People might think a coup was in progress.

    Yes, that is all correct. I don't think that strained relationships was the cause for a royal visit being delayed until Roosevelt's time in office, so much as you couldn't just hop on a 747 and jet off to another hemisphere back then.

    As for the "special relationship" being "recent", only since WW2....um, yeah, that is literally the case. When did you think it originated?
    Sure, it did take a while to go across but the Titanic sank in 1912 meaning there was a fair bit of traffic going across the Atlantic decades back. What stopped the king visiting earlier. No good reasons ?

    I was just surprised it took that long for a reigning monarch to visit. That US was going to overtake the UK was apparent by the late 19th early 20th century. Britain chose not to fight it. Usually when rising powers arrive they are challenged by the existing title holder. So there was an understanding much earlier or maybe accommodation is a better word. I need to refresh my memory about this, cpl years back i heard a prof talk about this period. Kori Schake. Lecture

    So the making of this special relationship i thought predated WW2. Or lets say its foundations did.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 06 Jul 19, at 08:45.

  6. #66
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    2,083
    FDR enjoyed military parades with actual rolling tanks.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1bOJD--3akI

  7. #67
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    No, if you say US military i'm thinking something from the Pentagon. More visible opposition than a retired general
    As I already said, you're not going to find public push back from the Pentagon against the President. Especially not with the whiny crybaby in the Oval Office.

    If retired generals, able to speak freely, are pushing back against this, you can take it to the bank that plenty of active-duty personnel feel exactly the same way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Why it does not happen more often is the question ? its seems more the exception than the norm. If i got the count right, it has only happened five times since WW2.
    Oh! you see a display of military hardware in a parade as a symbol of authoritarianism. The commies & fascists did it so we must refrain.
    Bingo. Why did it take so long to catch on to that? And not just any military hardware, but tanks and armored fighting vehicles in general. Air shows are quite popular here as they are elsewhere, but AFV's in the streets bring up a bad taste in people's mouths.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I've not seen it this way during our republic day parades where its a display of national strength. This is getting cultural now.
    It's always been cultural, once again I'm surprised it took you this long to figure that out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I found it amusing in one of those articles that some one said people must not panic if they saw tanks rolling down the street. Maybe in Europe this might be relevant but in the US, who else can those tanks belong to. lol. People might think a coup was in progress.
    You find it amusing, but as has been the case since the first post about this, Americans aren't terribly fond of an overbearing military presence in their streets, regardless of the reason. Air shows, fine. Museums, fine. Tanks rumbling through the neighborhood, not fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Sure, it did take a while to go across but the Titanic sank in 1912 meaning there was a fair bit of traffic going across the Atlantic decades back. What stopped the king visiting earlier. No good reasons ?
    Of course there was ocean liners, but you're talking weeks just in travel time for the US. That's a long time to be away from home for a British monarch in the age before both rapid travel and good secure communications were available.
    Take a look at this list of foreign visits made by Queen Victoria. Dozens of visits, all of them to Western European countries, never further than Italy. Notice how not a single visit is to a British possession either.

    I can't find a complete list of Edward VII's visits as monarch, but it doesn't appear that he did anything differently than his mother. He did visit the United States and Canada in 1860 as Prince of Wales.

    King George V visited Delhi in 1911, which was probably the first time a reigning British monarch traveled outside Europe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I was just surprised it took that long for a reigning monarch to visit. That US was going to overtake the UK was apparent by the late 19th early 20th century. Britain chose not to fight it. Usually when rising powers arrive they are challenged by the existing title holder. So there was an understanding much earlier or maybe accommodation is a better word. I need to refresh my memory about this, cpl years back i heard a prof talk about this period. Kori Schake.
    The accommodation was probably knowing that there wasn't anything the UK could do about the US overtaking them. Ironduke answered far better than I could.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    So the making of this special relationship i thought predated WW2. Or lets say its foundations did.
    Absolutely correct. Besides prior benign relations, World War I is what set that foundation in place. The obvious US military support in France, but most especially the assigning of United States Battleship Division Nine under direct British control, integrated into the Grand Fleet as the Sixth Battle Squadron, very much set the stage for later US/UK cooperation.
    TwentyFiveFortyFive

  8. #68
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironduke View Post
    There are other things we're doing in this country, domestically, that really took off Bush 43's first term, that to me are straight out of the playbook of the Stasi and KGB. And that we ought to really stop doing it. We need to re-take the moral high ground and not turn into our adversaries.
    Agree 100 percent. The gross overreaction the 9/11 (which is what the government tends to do when it's caught flatfooted like that) has troubled me as well.
    TwentyFiveFortyFive

  9. #69
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,544
    Why Trump's bizarre airport claim may have been his gaffe correction strategy backfiring at the most embarrassing moment

    Donald Trump's surprising claim that George Washington's revolutionary troops "took over the airports" during the War of Independence could be explained by his method of correcting himself when he misreads his autocue - doubling down and trying to incorporate the mistake into his speech.

    His bizarre ad lib, suggesting there were airports to seize more than 100 years before the first successful flight, came moments after he seemed to stumble over a phrase in his speech.

    Describing how Washington's patriots defeated the British between 1775 and 1783, the president told crowds gathered to hear his Fourth of July address: "Our army manned the air." At that point he paused briefly, apparently realising he had misspoken, before continuing: "It rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do …"

    Seemingly thrown by the mistakes, he then alluded to Fort McHenry, a Maryland stronghold best known for its role in a completely different conflict - the 1812 war with Britain.

    It's not clear exactly how the speech was meant to read. [And I doubt we'll ever know - TH

    However, it is not the first time that Mr Trump - who is more comfortable speaking off the cuff - has stumbled while reading an autocue, only to try to bluff his way out of it.

    His most common technique after getting a word wrong is to pause briefly and then add the correct word as if both happen to be correct, in the hope that he can style it out.

    This can make for some odd pronouncements.

    In a speech at the Values Voter Summit for conservative political groups in 2017, the president mixed up the words “future” and “furniture” – but clearly hoped that no one would notice.

    Praising hardworking Americans, he said: “And we see it in the mothers and the fathers who get up at the crack of dawn; they work two jobs, and sometimes three jobs. They sacrifice every day for the furniture … and future … of their children.”

    An address at the United Nations presented several difficulties which the president resolved in the same way.

    Before the representatives of almost 200 countries he spoke of “authority … and authoritarian … powers”, and declared that “hope is a word … and a world … of proud independent nations”.

    He invoked people who “struggle to reclaim their religious … and righteous ... destiny”; spoke of “reported … and repeated … warnings”; and declared that “tolerance for human struggling … and human smuggling … and trafficking is not humane”.

    On occasion Mr Trump tries a different approach, improvising a route from the wrong word to the right one. At the US Coast Guard graduation ceremony in 2017, he mistook the word “standard” for “stranded” – but had a nautical digression on hand to try and cover his mistake.

    “What standard … and really, if you think of it, when you talk about the great sailors and the great sailors of the world, we have them … but what stranded sailor doesn’t feel relief when those red racing stripes break the horizon?”

    In his 2018 State of the Union address, he paid tribute to a Homeland Security special agent named Celestino Martinez – who had apparently already suggested he be called by the wrong name.

    Mr Trump told the joint session of the United States Congress: “He goes by DJ … and CJ … he said call me either one. So we’ll call you CJ.”


    In April, talking about the Mueller report, he mispronounced the word "origins" as "oranges" three times. Appearing to realise it wasn't coming out right he tried to clarify what he meant: "The Mueller report I wish covered the oranges – how it started, the beginnings of the investigation."

    The former developer and reality TV star is famously loath to admit any mistakes, which could explain his need to try to cover his slips of the tongue – and as someone accused of making more than 10,000 false or misleading statements in his presidency so far he has gained a reputation for not being scrupulously attached to details.

    But the ridicule he has faced over his latest verbal misstep – particularly embarrassing since it took place at a vanity event he has been planning since Bastille Day 2017 - suggests he might be better off just acknowledging the occasional error and moving on. Link
    ___________

    I can answer why he doesn't acknowledge the occasional error: The. Man. Has. DEMENTIA.

    In Alzheimer’s, as language skills deteriorate, we see two types of tell-tale speech disorders, or paraphasias:

    Semantic paraphasia involves choosing the incorrect words. For instance, after Attorney General William Barr released a letter on the Mueller report, Trump said: “I hope they now go and take a look at the oranges, the oranges of that investigation, the beginnings of that investigation."

    Phonemic paraphasia, which is linked to the moderate to severe stages of Alzheimer’s, is described as "the substitution of a word with a nonword that preserves at least half of the segments and/or number of syllables of the intended word.” For example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu becomes “Betanyahu,” big league becomes “bigly,” anonymous becomes “enenamas” or "anenomynous," renovation becomes “renoversh,” missiles become "mishiz," space capsule becomes “capsicle,” midterm elections become "midtowm" and "midturn" elections, and Christmas becomes “Chrissus.”

    Trump’s speech patterns appear even more disordered when you go beyond the sound bite and look at a whole speech. He careens from one thought to the next in a parade of non sequiturs, frequently interrupting himself in the middle of a sentence to veer into another free association. When commentators described his two-hour speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference last month as “unhinged,” they were referring in large part to this quality. Link
    TwentyFiveFortyFive

  10. #70
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,279
    DE,

    You are seeing Trump as an aberration. What if he is a transitionary figure. Meaning those coming after are going to retain a good part of his core beliefs if having a different style.
    depends on what you mean by his "core beliefs". his core belief is Trump. his secondary belief is Trump. everything else is tertiary.

    now if you're talking about Trump's consistent political positions, then that's an interesting question. I think Trump has at least hollowed out, if not wrecked, the old Reaganite Republican Party-- see the fate of Justin Amash, for instance.

    the contrast between Trump's successes in terms of party discipline vs someone like Romney (whom got beaten not just by Obama but largely by his own party) means that the ethno-nationalist/populist elements that Trump promotes will be a part of the GOP in the future.

    TH,

    Correction: I am hoping that Trump is an aberration. I am hoping that those coming after him do not retain a good part of his core beliefs: Kleptocracy. Nepotism. Authoritarianism. Nationalism. Racism.
    maybe not so much the insane amount of nepotism, but the rest is already firmly embedded within the GOP. that's precisely why it was so easy for someone like Trump to take over the GOP in the first place, and proceed to gut every single one of his GOP rivals without even breaking a sweat. watching the likes of Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio genuflecting in front of Trump, and even imitating his Twitter language, should be a good indication to you about how much an "aberration" Trump is.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  11. #71
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Why it does not happen more often is the question ? its seems more the exception than the norm. If i got the count right, it has only happened five times since WW2.


    Oh! you see a display of military hardware in a parade as a symbol of authoritarianism. The commies & fascists did it so we must refrain.

    I've not seen it this way during our republic day parades where its a display of national strength. This is getting cultural now.
    DE, I'm not sure if you've been to the US, but we already have a problem with military hardware in our streets. Namely, the provisioning by the DoD of our local city police forces and county sheriffs with surplus military hardware, including armored personnel carriers and other armored vehicles. This and other surplus military hardware is being doled out very generously by the Pentagon (at the direction of our politicians, of course), and being used excessively in situations in which such a degree of force, intimidation, and instillation of fear is completely unwarranted.

    We need a little more Andy Griffith and a little less SEAL Team Six when it comes to the policing of our citizens.

    The proposal to have tanks rolling down the streets of DC would only further normalize what's already an existing trend in American militarized policing even more. I'm not sure if you were aware of this background, which is why I'm giving it to you.

    To you it may seem normal. I've seen the machine gun nests at your airport entrances, complete with sandbags and camouflage nettings. I've seen that most Indian police sling SKS and other 7.62mm battle rifles. Indian police armament and perhaps policing style is more along gendarmerie/paramilitary lines. In the US, the trend toward this model disturbs many of us.
    Last edited by Ironduke; 06 Jul 19, at 08:29.
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  12. #72
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,561
    ^ Ironduke, surplus military hardware could be sold to friendly countries with a discount. I am certain India would be interested if those are of value to Indian military planners. Give some free to countries like Afghanistan and better their COIN and CASO Ops team. Earn money and goodwill. Sometimes I feel that your state department can be compared to Indian bureaucracy. Red tape that is.

    As far as security in Indian Airports are concerned, we thank the Pakistan Army and their mercenaries without uniforms for those. Considering the population, even if 2 Pakistani terrorists get inside any Indian airport, you can very well figure out the damage. Would be 100s. And airport security, as well as security for other installations like oil depots, nuke installations are the responsibility of the CISF (Central Industrial Security Force), not police or para-military. Policing is a state subject in India, and Indian police are the worst equipped in terms of tools (guns etc) to counter modern policing challenges. Indian police deal with thugs with lathis, which is long wooden sticks.

    BSF is used to guard settled borders. Army for action outside the borders, as well as to defend LoC and LAC. Special forces (Army, Navy, AF, NSG) mix in with the para-military and the Army for hunting dreaded terrorists when called for. Para-military is primarily used for COIN & CASO. CRPF takes over the job of state police incase of rioting or during elections etc.

    As far as policing in the US goes, I agree with you that your police is armed to the teeth, which is not at all required. But maybe, the ease with which people can obtain guns in the US make a necessary case for it.

    As far as display of military might is concerned, I see it as a waste of taxpayers money. That money could be used to build shelters, and feed the homeless and poor population of Delhi for probably 6 months to a year.
    Last edited by Oracle; 06 Jul 19, at 14:02.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

  13. #73
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,311
    Will keep this simple....

    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Correction: I am hoping that Trump is an aberration. I am hoping that those coming after him do not retain a good part of his core beliefs: Kleptocracy. Nepotism. Authoritarianism. Nationalism. Racism.
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    DE,

    depends on what you mean by his "core beliefs". his core belief is Trump. his secondary belief is Trump. everything else is tertiary.

    now if you're talking about Trump's consistent political positions, then that's an interesting question. I think Trump has at least hollowed out, if not wrecked, the old Reaganite Republican Party-- see the fate of Justin Amash, for instance.
    His views on Immigration, Alliances & Trade

    Will that change/revert with another President or is Trump the new "it" and that "it" continues ?

  14. #74
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,279
    DE,

    immigration, certainly-- the GOP is moving from "we are just against ILLEGAL immigration" to "we are against current levels of legal immigration". on the political calculation, not altogether incorrect, that the new Americans will likely not back their corner.

    the other stuff, not so much (trade more than alliances).

    the GOP likely move away from the old libertarianism stuff, outside of cutting taxes, because they've found out the hard way that such a platform is highly unpopular with the electorate.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  15. #75
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,311
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    DE,

    immigration, certainly-- the GOP is moving from "we are just against ILLEGAL immigration" to "we are against current levels of legal immigration". on the political calculation, not altogether incorrect, that the new Americans will likely not back their corner.

    the other stuff, not so much (trade more than alliances).

    the GOP likely move away from the old libertarianism stuff, outside of cutting taxes, because they've found out the hard way that such a platform is highly unpopular with the electorate.
    So the immigration views will hold.

    I didn't understand what you meant by with trade & alliances ?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The war between Trump and the CIA
    By Parihaka in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 18 Feb 20,, 14:11
  2. Trump's Asia
    By troung in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08 Sep 19,, 16:33
  3. Trump's Europe
    By troung in forum International Politics
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 07 Nov 17,, 15:45

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •