Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 reds8n wrote:
https://twitter.com/intlspectator/status/808212067110961152

BREAKING: Editorial in China's state-linked newspaper says country could react to Trump by offering military support to enemies of the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-38286645?ocid=socialflow_twitter


Not even in the job yet, well done !

You mean like they are already doing with North Korea and collusion with Pakistan?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 sebster wrote:
It would be an outrageous abuse of government intelligence for an elected representative to do that. Comey's email was terrible, but at least he appeared to be acting as best he could as an independent government agent - he fethed up but its very unlikely he had any partisan motivations. On the other hand Obama's motivations would be partisan by definition.

Got to disagree here. If there is convincing evidence of a foreign power manipulating our elections then that evidence needs to be published as a counter to the attempted manipulation. You don't let them get away with it just because you're afraid of it being seen as a political move if you expose the plan. Otherwise you're sending the message that it's ok to attempt to interfere in our business, as long as you make sure you're helping the winning side.

Forgive me if I am being naive, but I was under the impression that after every Presidential election, there would be a review of sorts into the election: voter registration, counting, technical issues etc etc in order to identify and fix problems for future elections.

It happens in the UK, so it must happen in the USA? Right?

That would be up to the individual states. We actually have 51 separate elections that happen on the same date. Blame the framers.

We have the electoral commission in the UK to cover all that, so what you guys need is the Federal Department of Elections or the Federal Electoral Commissions or something like that.

Would never happen though.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


We have the electoral commission in the UK to cover all that, so what you guys need is the Federal Department of Elections or the Federal Electoral Commissions or something like that.

Would never happen though.

The FEC doesn't really have the power to do that (AFAIK). They just enforced federal election laws/voting rights. They are the people you call if you are denied your right to vote without just cause. Any sort of review would have to be conducted at state level.

 Frazzled wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
https://twitter.com/intlspectator/status/808212067110961152

BREAKING: Editorial in China's state-linked newspaper says country could react to Trump by offering military support to enemies of the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-38286645?ocid=socialflow_twitter


Not even in the job yet, well done !

You mean like they are already doing with North Korea and collusion with Pakistan?

That's right.

There's been no pressure put on NK via China ever.

 reds8n wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
https://twitter.com/intlspectator/status/808212067110961152

BREAKING: Editorial in China's state-linked newspaper says country could react to Trump by offering military support to enemies of the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-38286645?ocid=socialflow_twitter


Not even in the job yet, well done !

You mean like they are already doing with North Korea and collusion with Pakistan?

That's right.

There's been no pressure put on NK via China ever.

Hardly any. China could shut down NK in hours. NK gets its natural gas from China.

They get pretty much everything from/via China.*

China could easily destabilise the region nigh on instantly I agree.

But given the tensions, weapons and personnel deployed around that region I don't think that's in anyone's interests.




* hence why NK has really been pushing solar power where it can.

 reds8n wrote:
They get pretty much everything from/via China.*

China could easily destabilise the region nigh on instantly I agree.

But given the tensions, weapons and personnel deployed around that region I don't think that's in anyone's interests.




* hence why NK has really been pushing solar power where it can.

Yeah it's a dilemma for China. They need the North as a key ally, but the South buys billions of pounds worth of stuff from China every year, so they're keen for that to keep flowing. Decisions decisions decisions

Its in their interests to reign in NK before radioactive clouds float around after the US nukes it.

When NK gets effective capacity to nuke the West Coast it will end in fire.


Additionally this is the same China that has decided half the Pacific is its home waters and is building islands to defend that new zone.

 Frazzled wrote:
Its in their interests to reign in NK before radioactive clouds float around after the US nukes it.

When NK gets effective capacity to nuke the West Coast it will end in fire.


Additionally this is the same China that has decided half the Pacific is its home waters and is building islands to defend that new zone.

In the interests of balance

it's worth pointing out that the USA has a fair few military bases in the region, so it's not all one sided.

China wants NK as a , literal, buffer between them and SK -- or more pertinently the USA influence in/through SK.

http://www.earthnutshell.com/100-photos-from-north-korea-part2/




That's China on the right side of the picture/river, they wouldn't be too enthralled at all those USA armed forced people no longer being south of the DMZ.

 reds8n wrote:
China wants NK as a , literal, buffer between them and SK -- or more pertinently the USA influence in/through SK.

http://www.earthnutshell.com/100-photos-from-north-korea-part2/




That's China on the right side of the picture/river, they wouldn't be too enthralled at all those USA armed forced people no longer being south of the DMZ.

Its that evilz South Korea, corrupting poor innocent China's morals.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chinese-rappers-hip-hop_us_55ca6009e4b0923c12be783e

 Frazzled wrote:
Its in their interests to reign in NK before radioactive clouds float around after the US nukes it.

When NK gets effective capacity to nuke the West Coast it will end in fire.


Additionally this is the same China that has decided half the Pacific is its home waters and is building islands to defend that new zone.

Why exactly would the US nuke North Korea? They could just take them out with their conventional military without committing the war crime of using WMDs.

 Frazzled wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
China wants NK as a , literal, buffer between them and SK -- or more pertinently the USA influence in/through SK.

http://www.earthnutshell.com/100-photos-from-north-korea-part2/

Spoiler:

That's China on the right side of the picture/river, they wouldn't be too enthralled at all those USA armed forced people no longer being south of the DMZ.

Its that evilz South Korea, corrupting poor innocent China's morals.

No, they're worried about the South Korean IEDs, I mean, Galaxy Note 7s.

OT but I had my first Trump nightmare last night. Had a dream that Trump's tweets were actually bits of a program that, when put together would activate the Cybermen (yes those Cybermen) to take over the world.

I'm surprised this new revelation about Russia hacking isnt a bigger story. I would think more people would be ourtraged that an outside government had such a profound impact in influencing the election.

As far as we're aware this has never happend before. Wouldnt it call the legitimacy of the election into question?

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I'm surprised this new revelation about Russia hacking isnt a bigger story. I would think more people would be ourtraged that an outside government had such a profound impact in influencing the election.

As far as we're aware this has never happend before. Wouldnt it call the legitimacy of the election into question?

Maybe.

But what I do know is that I don't know electoral law enough to know for sure.

And I also know that the people who would decide what to do about it are deciding what to do about it.

And I also know that all I can really do about it is just read the news articles as they get posted.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I'm surprised this new revelation about Russia hacking isnt a bigger story. I would think more people would be ourtraged that an outside government had such a profound impact in influencing the election.

As far as we're aware this has never happend before. Wouldnt it call the legitimacy of the election into question?

Unless someone wants to make the claim (and can back it up) that the Russians hacked voting machines to the extent that they fraudulently changed the results of actual votes, no, it should not call the election into question.

No one seems to be disputing the info Wikileaks made accessible. What is in dispute is how they got it.

Major difference between election fraud and 'influencing' an election. It is always hard to judge the effectiveness of Influence operations, ask any MISO guy.

The Clinton campaign and associated PACs spent over 1 billion dollars to influence the election. Members of the press directly colluded with the Clinton campaign in an effort to influence the election. The Trump campaign worked hard to influence the election. President Obama tried hard to influence the election. Hell, he spent our tax dollars to influence the Israeli elections. The millions of dollars the Clinton foundation got from foreign donors which aided her campaign were donated to influence the election.

The information released by Wikileaks, regardless of the source, showed levels of corruption and collusion that previously were only the realm of conspiracy theorists.

If the Russians (or ANY other outside agency) hacked the DNC and Podesta, our intel services ought to figure out who/how and take appropriate measures. We sure as gak don't seem to upset at the millions of records (including my wife's and my security clearance info) that actually WAS hacked and stolen by a foreign entity. The DNC and Podesta are not even gov't agencies. They need to secure their own gak, and should have done so. The indicators are the info was LEAKED, not hacked. Did the leakers work for the Russians? Who knows. If we are so sure we know the source it is pretty fething appalling no one has been arrested yet.

But again, unless someone hacked voting machines to the extent the election results were fraudulently changed, no, the election should not be in question.

 reds8n wrote:
https://twitter.com/intlspectator/status/808212067110961152

BREAKING: Editorial in China's state-linked newspaper says country could react to Trump by offering military support to enemies of the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-38286645?ocid=socialflow_twitter


Not even in the job yet, well done !

Well rattle the saber and don't be surprised it backfires.

No one on the US side rattled sabers here.

Yeah trump did when he talked to tiawan which was a stupid move from such a "great" negotiator

 Frazzled wrote:
No one on the US side rattled sabers here.

Calling a country/province that we havent spoken to in 40 years because we knew it would piss off China isnt saber rattling?

 Ustrello wrote:
Yeah trump did when he talked to tiawan which was a stupid move from such a "great" negotiator

Um...no thats not saber rattling. Circling their new manmade island with mardi gras beads dropped F18s from the Stennis is saber rattling.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Yeah trump did when he talked to tiawan which was a stupid move from such a "great" negotiator

Um...no thats not saber rattling. Circling their new manmade island with mardi gras beads dropped F18s from the Stennis is saber rattling.

Yes it is, as stated above. You don't know much about the past 60ish years of Chinese history do you?

Yea...I kinda do.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Yeah trump did when he talked to tiawan which was a stupid move from such a "great" negotiator

Um...no thats not saber rattling. Circling their new manmade island with mardi gras beads dropped F18s from the Stennis is saber rattling.

Saber rattling is subjective, but a good gauge is how the other side reacts to the alleged saber rattling which for China was to send a nuclear bomber on a circuit around Taiwan which I think meets most people's definition of saber rattling. Of course it was stupid saber rattling, because no one in their right mind believe's China is threatening Taiwan with nuclear weapons any more than Trump taking a congratulatory call from the President of Taiwan should be considered an announcement that the US is doing away with the one China policy.

 Lord of Deeds wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Yeah trump did when he talked to tiawan which was a stupid move from such a "great" negotiator

Um...no thats not saber rattling. Circling their new manmade island with mardi gras beads dropped F18s from the Stennis is saber rattling.

Saber rattling is subjective, but a good gauge is how the other side reacts to the alleged saber rattling which for China was to send a nuclear bomber on a circuit around Taiwan which I think meets most people's definition of saber rattling. Of course it was stupid saber rattling, because no one in their right mind believe's China is threatening Taiwan with nuclear weapons any more than Trump taking a congratulatory call from the President of Taiwan should be considered an announcement that the US is doing away with the one China policy.

Fair points.

Hey, I have a question.

Should we discover a way to contact an alien civilization on another planet, how hard will the US push to monopolize the whole thing?

And also, how much emphasis will be placed on the diplomat's religiousness? Contact seemed to think it was a lot, and CinemaSins agreed.

If we contact aliens: this should be the message.

"Warning planetwide quarantine. For you own safety, do not come here, approach or attempt to contact. "

On the other hand, all the xenophobes will be too busy ranting about "human supremacy" to bother any other group.