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.

 thekingofkings wrote:
I dont agree, interests change over time and countries that were once useful allies don't always remain that way.

You can disagree all you want, but that just means you're wrong. This is not something that is open to debate, and you even concede that you're wrong in your own statement. You say that France and the UK are expendable now, but, as you said, interests change over time and useful allies don't always remain that way. An alliance with China may be less useful in 20 years, while events of that time make the UK a desperately needed ally. That's why it's utter lunacy to treat strong alliances that you already have as expendable, especially when you aren't getting anything in return.

I think its time to move on from the old world and start looking more to the rising economies of asia for alliances and trade. We could invest in South America more and Africa. be as incredulous as you want but are you seriously suggesting that Europe has more to offer than Asia?

{whynotboth.gif}

I don't have to suggest that Europe has more to offer because the two are not in conflict. We are not damaging our existing alliances as the unfortunate but necessary price of building other, more valuable alliances. We're throwing them away out of sheer incompetence as Trump fumbles around with no coherent policy plans beyond impulsive rants on twitter. The most likely result of Trump's foreign policy incompetence is that we lose our current allies while failing to get new allies, and end the Trump era in a far worse position than where we started.

 thekingofkings wrote:

I dont agree, interests change over time and countries that were once useful allies don't always remain that way. I think its time to move on from the old world and start looking more to the rising economies of asia for alliances and trade. We could invest in South America more and Africa. be as incredulous as you want but are you seriously suggesting that Europe has more to offer than Asia?

Yes.


Assuming you're not a fan of tyranny, slavery, and poor quality goods. Unless you think you're selling something to them,and then my only response is LOL.

 Peregrine wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
I dont agree, interests change over time and countries that were once useful allies don't always remain that way.

You can disagree all you want, but that just means you're wrong. This is not something that is open to debate, and you even concede that you're wrong in your own statement. You say that France and the UK are expendable now, but, as you said, interests change over time and useful allies don't always remain that way. An alliance with China may be less useful in 20 years, while events of that time make the UK a desperately needed ally. That's why it's utter lunacy to treat strong alliances that you already have as expendable, especially when you aren't getting anything in return.

I think its time to move on from the old world and start looking more to the rising economies of asia for alliances and trade. We could invest in South America more and Africa. be as incredulous as you want but are you seriously suggesting that Europe has more to offer than Asia?

{whynotboth.gif}

I don't have to suggest that Europe has more to offer because the two are not in conflict. We are not damaging our existing alliances as the unfortunate but necessary price of building other, more valuable alliances. We're throwing them away out of sheer incompetence as Trump fumbles around with no coherent policy plans beyond impulsive rants on twitter. The most likely result of Trump's foreign policy incompetence is that we lose our current allies while failing to get new allies, and end the Trump era in a far worse position than where we started.

you love saying things are not open to debate, obviously it is open, I dont agree with you and we are arguing. these "strong" alliances are really not so great. Trump wont be a problem much longer. About the only part I can agree with you on is the last paragraph.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:

I dont agree, interests change over time and countries that were once useful allies don't always remain that way. I think its time to move on from the old world and start looking more to the rising economies of asia for alliances and trade. We could invest in South America more and Africa. be as incredulous as you want but are you seriously suggesting that Europe has more to offer than Asia?

Yes.


Assuming you're not a fan of tyranny, slavery, and poor quality goods. Unless you think you're selling something to them,and then my only response is LOL.

Surely you jest. Japan and Singapore have much better tech than Europe produces. As for tyranny and slavery, yeah Europe was and is still pretty good at that.

 thekingofkings wrote:
Trump wont be a problem much longer.

It;s not how long he's president, it's how much damage he can do to the world before someone stops him, possibly permanently.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
Trump wont be a problem much longer.

It;s not how long he's president, it's how much damage he can do to the world before someone stops him, possibly permanently.

sometime this November. Even if he is not removed from office (and pence with him) he will be effectively sidelined. I think he will be removed personally.

 thekingofkings wrote:

Surely you jest. Japan and Singapore have much better tech than Europe produces. As for tyranny and slavery, yeah Europe was and is still pretty good at that.

No, they really don't. Best tech comes out of Finland these days. You'd be surprised how many companies people assume are Asian and they're actually European.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 thekingofkings wrote:


sometime this November.

I think impeachment is a long shot. I think it more likely someone will lose their gak and try to kill him. A few people already have.

 thekingofkings wrote:
you love saying things are not open to debate, obviously it is open, I dont agree with you and we are arguing.

I say it because it's true. You are stubbornly writing words, but those words are the equivalent of yelling "1+1=3" over and over again. You aren't just wrong, you're so badly wrong and so far outside the realm of legitimate foreign policy disagreements that nothing you say can be taken seriously.

these "strong" alliances are really not so great.

...

No, of course not. No strength at all in a relationship with the UK where the UK is willing to do whatever we want from them, and where nobody on either side ever questions that we are allies with common goals. Nope, better just throw that away in exchange for nothing but smug satisfaction at doing the opposite of everything Obama did.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
Trump wont be a problem much longer.

It;s not how long he's president, it's how much damage he can do to the world before someone stops him, possibly permanently.

The fact that he won at all and can do damage is the damage.

It tells the rest of the world they can't rely on the American political system. Not that they could before, but it's really glaring now.

 Peregrine wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
you love saying things are not open to debate, obviously it is open, I dont agree with you and we are arguing.

I say it because it's true. You are stubbornly writing words, but those words are the equivalent of yelling "1+1=3" over and over again. You aren't just wrong, you're so badly wrong and so far outside the realm of legitimate foreign policy disagreements that nothing you say can be taken seriously.

these "strong" alliances are really not so great.

...

No, of course not. No strength at all in a relationship with the UK where the UK is willing to do whatever we want from them, and where nobody on either side ever questions that we are allies with common goals. Nope, better just throw that away in exchange for nothing but smug satisfaction at doing the opposite of everything Obama did.

Amazing, I think the same about what you are saying.

 thekingofkings wrote:
Amazing, I think the same about what you are saying.

The difference is that what I'm saying aligns with the consensus of experts in foreign policy, while your position finds its only support in (arguably) the worst president in US history.

 Peregrine wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
Amazing, I think the same about what you are saying.

The difference is that what I'm saying aligns with the consensus of experts in foreign policy, while your position finds its only support in (arguably) the worst president in US history.

you mean experts you agree with. Like him or not, Bolton, Pompeo, etc are also experts.

 Ouze wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
You're asking why I don't think the US government is establishing concentration camps for migrant children? Because I'm not a fething idiot, I guess.

Hm.

That didn't quite come out the way I meant it, re-reading. To be clear, I'm not saying you're an idiot, or implying it; just that I think this "Auschwitz 2.0" theory is absolutely pants on head Alex Jones style crazy talk. This country did some awful things and still does some rather crappy things but that is really, really out there.

I have family from Germany that was around when Auschwitz 1.0 was in operation. And right up until the death camps were captured by allied soldiers and put in the public eye, they were considered, by the wider population of Germany, exactly that sort of crazy idea that no one took seriously.

That's why it's a bad idea to discount stuff like this instead of keep a wary eye on it. Stuff happens when no one is looking, so we'd best keep looking to make sure stuff DOESN'T happen. Or to put it another way, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty".

Trump has not exactly endured himself to non-european counties either. For example his calling African counties "gakholes". Considering Africa as a whole is rapidly growing economically, enough that China has been investing quite a bit of capital themselves into it, the cheeto's brazen flippantly is not going to get us anything good, even if we decide to switch gears on foreign policy.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

I think impeachment is a long shot. I think it more likely someone will lose their gak and try to kill him. A few people already have.

Did I miss an assassination attempt?

It's a circus I tell you, a circus!

I'm for letting him have his whole term. One is on principle, if a POTUS is elected they deserve to get the whole four years, or put another way the nation deserves to endure the whole four years. Every month of his nonsense we endure will ingrain the memory of why not to elect people like him a little bit more. But on another note; there is nothing anyone can do to Trump that will be worse or carry more justice than what he will do to himself.

At risk of sounding overly dramatic, for Trump to destroy himself while dragging the country through the mud will be a terrible experience for people all around but sometimes that's the only thing humans learn from.

 Vulcan wrote:
I have family from Germany that was around when Auschwitz 1.0 was in operation. And right up until the death camps were captured by allied soldiers and put in the public eye, they were considered, by the wider population of Germany, exactly that sort of crazy idea that no one took seriously.

I think this is historical revisionism. The persecution of the Jews in Germany was enshrined in public laws and a lot of the stuff that happened was reported. This was known to the world in 1942, so I don't buy that the people who lived 10 miles from the camps didn't know they existed.

Im just waiting for this guy to suggest Canada and Mexico dont need to have good relations with the United States either.

 Peregrine wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
Amazing, I think the same about what you are saying.

The difference is that what I'm saying aligns with the consensus of experts in foreign policy, while your position finds its only support in (arguably) the worst president in US history.

Exactly, not to mention that the US already has interests in both Africa and Asia. Yet the alliance system in Asia is more 'unstable' because WW2 still causes tension between US allies in the region which requires stronger US leadership, Europe can function more cooperatively as a US ally. Trump is actually doing well in allowing the Asian allies to drift away leaderless. The TPP Trump hates was important in retaining the upper hand in East Asia and force China to play by the rules of the US. Nothing Trump is doing has furthered US power anywhere. China couldn't be happier with Trump.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
I have family from Germany that was around when Auschwitz 1.0 was in operation. And right up until the death camps were captured by allied soldiers and put in the public eye, they were considered, by the wider population of Germany, exactly that sort of crazy idea that no one took seriously.

I think this is historical revisionism. The persecution of the Jews in Germany was enshrined in public laws and a lot of the stuff that happened was reported. This was known to the world in 1942, so I don't buy that the people who lived 10 miles from the camps didn't know they existed.

The Netherlands even has a saying for it right after 45: "wir haben es nicht gewusst", the German attitude towards the Holocaust in an ironically meant saying.

Already in 1941 the highest level of German government was discussing how to prevent 'rumors' from circulating about what was happening to Jewish people. Surviving SD reports back up that most of the population had an idea of what was happening. In certain parts of Silesia the slogan "Russland-Katyn, Deutschland-Auschwitz" started showing up in 43. How could most people not have an inkling of what was happening when half of the male adult population that served in the army was witnessing and partcipating in the operations of the Einsatzgruppen in the East?

Already in 1941 the highest level of German government was discussing how to prevent 'rumors' from circulating about what was happening to Jewish people. Surviving SD reports back up that most of the population had an idea of what was happening. In certain parts of Silesia the slogan "Russland-Katyn, Deutschland-Auschwitz" started showing up in 43. How could most people not have an inkling of what was happening when half of the male adult population that served in the army was witnessing and partcipating in the operations of the Einsatzgruppen in the East?

While I think any letters coming from the frontlines and occupied territories were prone to censorship, the sheer flux of wounded soldiers coming back from the front for medical treatment in their home states must've brought a lot of harrowing news for the civilians there.

My paternal grandfather was a dentist who got drafted into working for/with the Wehrmacht. I never talked to him about WW2 before he died - I was too young - but in hindsight I wouldn't believe him if he said he had no idea what was going on.

 Witzkatz wrote:

Already in 1941 the highest level of German government was discussing how to prevent 'rumors' from circulating about what was happening to Jewish people. Surviving SD reports back up that most of the population had an idea of what was happening. In certain parts of Silesia the slogan "Russland-Katyn, Deutschland-Auschwitz" started showing up in 43. How could most people not have an inkling of what was happening when half of the male adult population that served in the army was witnessing and partcipating in the operations of the Einsatzgruppen in the East?

While I think any letters coming from the frontlines and occupied territories were prone to censorship, the sheer flux of wounded soldiers coming back from the front for medical treatment in their home states must've brought a lot of harrowing news for the civilians there.

My paternal grandfather was a dentist who got drafted into working for/with the Wehrmacht. I never talked to him about WW2 before he died - I was too young - but in hindsight I wouldn't believe him if he said he had no idea what was going on.

I did some research into letters from the Eastern Front for my degree and you would be surprised in what was allowed to stay in in regards to censorship. Antisemitism, rascism and even descriptions of shooting people are not crossed out. But self censorship has always been an issue in these types of documents.

As for what your grandfather knew. It really depends on when he was drafted and where he served. But its unlikely that if he served in the East in 41-42 he didn't hear or see anything in regards to what was happening. And while not directly applicable to the Holocaust, even more soldiers would have known or participated in the even more widespread violence outside of that directed against the Jewish population in the East since 41.

The idea that this can be kept secret is simply untrue. Its even more unreasonable to expect it can in the current day in regards to the US.

 LordofHats wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
Confidence in US leadership, change from Obama to Trump:
-75%: Germany
-71%: South Korea
-70%: France
-57%: UK
-54% Japan
+42%: Russia
(Pew Research 2017)

To be fair, Trump like a lot of Republicans seems to think that being able to scream "feth you" at the top of your lungs is what being respected means

That is true respect indeed, at least until the big guys in white coats come with an anti-thrash jacket and big syringe of Thorazine.

However such things don't happen in international diplomacy, so the USA is safe for at least a decade while the EU and other and allies try to construct a world order in which they don't need the USA any more.

However such things don't happen in international diplomacy, so the USA is safe for at least a decade while the EU and other and allies try to construct a world order in which they don't need the USA any more.

I don't think Trump is capable of single handedly destroying US foreign policy. The danger, and what everyone is probably waiting to see, is will the present disfunction be the new norm of Republican politics. We're still I think at a point where a new president in 2020 with an actual foreign policy (as opposed to no policy) can recover things to at least the point we can write off the Trump years as an embarrassing but fluke failure. If however Trump wins reelection, which dear god please no any Republican at this point is a better choice and that's saying something, or his style becomes the style of the party then we're looking at a serious problem. Republicans talking nonsense has always been a problem, but it's generally been tempered by the party being more pragmatic in practical terms but that's been sliding off the cliff ever since the loss in 2008.

As I've said before, to look to the American future, you have to look to the past.

And in this case, comparing the USA to great empires of the past: Britain and the Roman Empire.

Rome didn't fall over night, rather it was a systematic decline over decades. And it was two world wars that did for Britain.

But even after WW1 when the Empire reached its zenith and controlled a quater of the globe, the Great War had knocked the stuffing out of Britain and it was down hill from there...


The Founding Fathers laid rock solid foundations when they built America and 9 times out of 10, the system is good enough to cope, the Civil War being a prime example

but those foundations are not impregnable

and the decline will be slow, like waves crashing on rocks for years before the rocks collapse...

Unless of course a modern day FDR springs up to turn things around

 Grey Templar wrote:

Did I miss an assassination attempt?

Not much of one, a guy draped himself in an American flag and shot up one of Trumps golf courses looking for him.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Did I miss an assassination attempt?

Not much of one, a guy draped himself in an American flag and shot up one of Trumps golf courses looking for him.

You’d think that would have gotten more coverage.

This is what happens when you let people operate under the belief that 'government is bad and can never do anything right' actually becone in charge of the government. All they know how to do is purposefully make government not work.

 skyth wrote:
This is what happens when you let people operate under the belief that 'government is bad and can never do anything right' actually becone in charge of the government. All they know how to do is purposefully make government not work.

For me, that's probably the saddest part of modern US politics.

For more than 200 years, political parties in America have obviously been opponents and at each other's throats.

But there was always a sense that yeah, we hate each other, but if we have to unite for the national good, we'll do it...

That is now missing, and American politics is all the poorer for it.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm for letting him have his whole term. One is on principle, if a POTUS is elected they deserve to get the whole four years, or put another way the nation deserves to endure the whole four years

I think it would be best for Trump to go the whole term, barring communist revolution lmao, for the very simple reason that he's so much of a fuckup that he won't leave any room for the competent evil people with him to breathe. If he didn't essentially impose constant crisis mode they would be able to go much further. The damage that Trump does is less than the damage that Pence would do.

 Grey Templar wrote:

You’d think that would have gotten more coverage.

Happened at the same time as the most recent school shooting. Only one of these two things gets the media dick hard.