Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SceptreCore

Are we ready for war?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Leonid said:

Don’t get me wrong - I’ve not turned into a socialist. I’ve just gained some perspective that we lost control of sensible capitalism somewhere and now have a rule by corporate elites who dictate our immigration policy as “good for the economy” but forget to mention that it’s only they that get richer while wages stagnate and housing and other infrastructure is exacerbated.

ummm .maybe around the time we started paying our pollies waaaay too much money 

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eveln said:

ummm .maybe around the time we stared paying our pollies waaaay too much money 

We should pay more for a better quality of politician.

They get paid less than ceo’s for far more abuse and responsibility.

Money is not the biggest issue in the quality of our politicians.

I would say the biggest problem in our politicians is that they

a. Speak to opinionistas in Fairfax and Murdoch rags

b. Read the opinions of opinionistas in Fairfax and Murdoch rags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

c. Forget that Joe Average doesn't give a flying fuck about Indonesian illiteracy but does care that grandma can't afford the electricity bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Leonid said:
12 minutes ago, eveln said:

ummm .maybe around the time we stared paying our pollies waaaay too much money 

We should pay more for a better quality of politician.

They get paid less than ceo’s for far more abuse and responsibility.

Money is not the biggest issue in the quality of our politicians.

I would say the biggest problem in our politicians is that they

a. Speak to opinionistas in Fairfax and Murdoch rags

b. Read the opinions of opinionistas in Fairfax and Murdoch rags

I think it's more than that Leonid.

These people are there to guide Aus and it's people safely into the future. It seems to me they're distracted by the pay and perks and what they can get out if it waaay  before their thoughts come back to why they were voted into the job.

And the voting them into the job is what seperates them from CEOs .

Money is the issue. The more money you give a person, the more they think they're worth, regardless of actual fact of the matter.

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, eveln said:

Money is the issue. The more money you give a person, the more they think they're worth, regardless of actual fact of the matter.

OK. How much should we pay you to be PM of Australia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Leonid said:

OK. How much should we pay you to be PM of Australia?

my pay ? Hmmm $200,000.00 per anum

Edited by eveln
doozy of an error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats. You are President-General for life because nobody (not even bums from the street) would take that job for $200.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Leonid said:

Congrats. You are President-General for life because nobody (not even bums from the street) would take that job for $200.

Why not ? You get a great home to live in. Office provided. Staff provided. Job-travel required provided. Sure you be working 24/7, but then you knew that going in.

... But you know I haven't been voted in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Errrr... you know that's not how it works right?

Job travel is not provided. You pay for it yourself, then expense it. Gonna be hard on $200. Staff need to be managed. You get a home to live in but it's still public property - you can't really change shit.

Also working 24/7 for $200? That's slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Leonid said:

Errrr... you know that's not how it works right?

Job travel is not provided. You pay for it yourself, then expense it. Gonna be hard on $200. Staff need to be managed. You get a home to live in but it's still public property - you can't really change shit.

Also working 24/7 for $200? That's slavery.

You be on call 24/7, cos you be voted in as The Prime Minister of the country you and yours love, live, and perhaps want to die in. If as the PM you chose to utterly forget twitter or any other online
social media, then you might get a little more space for yourself. I mean, look at all the pollies and Trump, they are continually derided for their twitter-chat.

So you choose the travel necessary to the job wisely.

So ... staff need to be managed ? I don't get how that is a problem for my pay packet.

'Course the home is public property, as is the office ... but you knew and know that. Why would you think it would be otherwise ?

Also as a private citizen I think you might be working under your idea of slave conditions ... if you can do it for your family I'm sure the PM can do it for his

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And all that for two hundred bucks. I reckon you wouldn't last a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Leonid said:

And all that for two hundred bucks. I reckon you wouldn't last a week.

 oopsie there ! missing something there  try $200,000. per anum ... < goes back up to edit  >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't touch it for $200k. I want more than that for my privacy and constantly being scrutinised along with my family as it goes these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

A welcome return by Leo ?

There's a great deal of truth in your take on the current global political temperature although I only partly agree with you about Trump.

He's not really very smart but he is a good salesperson, of himself to an audience who lap it up in the same way his Apprentice show attracted the ratings it did. Smart enough to know that being outrageous, behaving as a tyrant, grandstanding, is actually appealing to a significant slice of the population, or at least the population of the U.S. In a country that does not require a turn up at the ballot boxes, is pretty fed up with the politicians on offer and a large slice of which have been reared on television not education.

Unfortunately that is not the behavior or experience or quality that makes for a competent President.

I utterly agree with you that he really did not have much of significance to stand against in the election, Clinton just does not have the presence to appeal and looks too much like the next step in a dynasty whilst having to deal with suspicions she was likely to be Bill's puppet. Sanders, well, I suspect he'd have had a heart attack if he had won.

However the swing in the mid-terms signifies an awakening of American political awareness among those who can at least tie their shoes and walk and chew gum.

What the Dems need now is a REAL candidate, shall have to see who arises.

I tend to see the world more in a military than a political sense although obviously the two are intertwined but I do agree with some of Trump's decrees, can hardly call them debated decisions. The increased funding for the U.S. military mostly corrects the prior imbalance of not much money going to new programmes for a decade, not in real terms, telling NATO as in the European members to pull their weight was way overdue and getting out of Syria was only sensible, should never have been there in the first place.

Trump's biggest problem is he is alienating the very party that he is the titular head of.If he does make it to the next election a lot of Republicans are going to either not vote or vote Democrat just to get rid of him because he is an embarrassment.

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, eveln said:

You be on call 24/7, cos you be voted in as The Prime Minister of the country you and yours love, live, and perhaps want to die in. 

Maybe for most former PMs, but I never felt that about K Rudd, and he does not even live in Australia any more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, eveln said:

 oopsie there ! missing something there  try $200,000. per anum ... < goes back up to edit  >

I’ll make that much next year, running my own business, without having my underwear scrutinised, being able to say what I think and not having the lives of 23m people to be responsible for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chrisg said:

Unfortunately that is not the behavior or experience or quality that makes for a competent President.

Was Obama a competent president? Bush 43?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

Obama was ok, a few of his decisions were questionable and he was possibly guided a little too much by his advisors whereas Trump is the polar opposite.

GWB was hopeless, I still wonder if that pic of him reading a book to a kids class upside down on 9/11 was actually photo-shopped.

Still, it is a long reach back to a truly competent U.S. President, nothing post JFK really shines and no-one will ever know if Kennedy would actually have become what the myth has made of him.

It is not really all their fault, the job is too big for one man.

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet I believe Obama to be the least competent president and the primary representative of everything that is broken for 70 years.

Hopeless fluffball that mixed up values and ideology with zero tactical or strategic thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

He inherited an utter mess, possibly very few persons could have sorted it all out but he did try.

I'd agree about mixing values with ideology but sometimes that mix has credence. His tactical and strategic thinking was in part a consequence of well intentioned advisors whom as mentioned he perhaps relied upon a little too much.

I'm reminded of Truman who sure had his faults but he faced two very dire decisions on his watch.

Days after he took command he had to make the nuclear decision, he'd only just been briefed in on nukes and like most he probably did not understand what he was unleashing.

When NK invaded SK he was essentially alone to make the decision that took the U.S. and a lot of allies into that war. He had people like LeMay, a true nutter advocating a nuclear strike, just as that idiot did over Cuba, after Japan he declined to make that call but he did support SK and that country is now a powerful ally in Asia. The Russians had walked away from the table at the U.N. in a typical huff, the "Hotline" was a decade away so he had to decide alone and fought a war with untrustworthy commanders that ended in a ceasefire that was and remains unsatisfactory.

But, as the sign on his desk said "The Buck Stops Here."

At least he understood the gravity of the job and accepted responsibility.

Subsequent Presidents have mostly led via committee, until Trump.

The problem is that most, not all, of Trump's decisions have been shithouse - anyone can get something right from time to time but Trump truly has no comprehension of foreign affairs and plays to the audience on domestic matters.

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I implied - Obama knew foreign affairs but fucked everything up even more. A monkey would have been a better president.

In fact, a monkey is a better president. Right now. This monkey does not understand foreign affairs but it seems to get most foreign affairs decisions right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheManFromPOST said:

Maybe for most former PMs, but I never felt that about K Rudd, and he does not even live in Australia any more

Okay. TBH though, the shit that was being engineered by the 'faceless back room' men and women of the party and resultant happenings would make an individual feel less inclined on loyalty ... just sayin'

He's not a PM anymore either ... bet he comes back here to die though

 

3 hours ago, Leonid said:

I’ll make that much next year, running my own business, without having my underwear scrutinised, being able to say what I think and not having the lives of 23m people to be responsible for.

Well good for you ?  I believe from what you've posted over the years on here, that it is quite possibly well deserved.

The tax man and any others looking to do business with your company will be scrutinizing you pretty thoroughly, perhaps. Yes it's different I know, and if you never break a rule or become too famous then you
likely won't hit the headlines of any  media stream.

 

6 hours ago, fliptopia said:

I wouldn't touch it for $200k. I want more than that for my privacy and constantly being scrutinised along with my family as it goes these days. 

Successful pollies like the infamy and or glory of their choice of profession. imo ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foreign affairs is pretty much always a cluster-fuck in Washington, to many fingers in the pie. Obama had a good try at sorting out some legacies but didn't achieve very much I agree.

Calling Trump a monkey is a disservice to our primate cousins.

I don't know about Trump on foreign affairs, chumming up to Putin and Fat Boy unless he is adopting the Chinese plan of enemies closer is not really achieving much no matter how much he Trumpets (:)) and the way he is playing hardball with China is frankly stupid - the U's. exported all their industries to China in the name of economy they can hardly bleat about having to buy goods back that they don't make in-country any more.

On the other hand as mentioned his stance on NATO, and Syria really, whilst I think them correct were motivated by the thing Trump thinks he understands - money.

Then there is The Wall... stupid idea and yet it has shut down a chunk of government because the wig didn't get his way.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wall is a phenomenal idea and they work. Just ask the Palestinians about how much harder it is to kill the yahoods now. Morocco’s wall with Western Sahara works.

The EU-funded Turkey/Syria wall has dropped the flow of invaders into Europe.

The Saudi-Yemen wall is preventing aid and Houthi infiltration.

Walls work. They have never not worked.

Trump is asking for $5b to keep illegal immigrants and crimes out. That is barely more than the US spends in Afghanistan in a month. That wall will drop ICE costs, healthcare costs, policing costs, worker exploitation.

The thing about his China stance is that he made China blink. The terms of trade are vastly improved and sanctioning Chinese businesses has forced that meeting with North Korea. He even managed to bend Erdogan by sanctioning the entire country to return one pastor.

Iran is up a shit creek, and even funnier is the way he made the EU look like fools in the process. Which to be fair isn’t hard nor requires Trump. So maybe we won’t count that as a point?

With regards to Putin... you know my opinion on that asshole. But I will say this... Putin probably helped get Trump elected for the very same reasons Americans wanted Trump.

Because they are sick of meddling in foreign affairs between general assholes and sand-dwelling camel humpers who have a genetic wish to either repeat the Holocaust on one side or return the world to the 7th Century on the other? And for what? A few oil dollars? For the price of a broken generation of young men with limbs blown off so that some fuckwit working for The New York Times can get a Pulitzer for some shot of the wreckage of war?

I keep telling you this but it ain’t entering:

The world has been broken for 70 years. I’ve felt it for two decades but Trump’s win sharpened the optics. Every single thing we’ve done as Westerners, in foreign affairs has merely perpetuated conflict.

My first realisation of how badly we were doing was when Sri Lanka flattened the Tamil Tigers. They proved a war could be won against terrorism.

We proved in 1945 that we could do the same against an ideology.

Frankly, if our enemies want to murder themselves, we should help them - not stop it. And if we want to stop wars and win them we gotta go back to the way we did things in Dresden and Hamburg, and do the morality accounting later.

Obama should never have gone into Syria or Libya or expanded the war to Africa or to Yemen. If they all want to kill each other, fucking let them. Fight a proxy war if you’ve got to. Throw some money someone’s way. Give weapons to someone else.

The West should look out for the West. Everyone else can go jump off a cliff. Seriously, would anyone actually notice any civilizational impact if one bunch of Islamist donkey fuckers displaced another and erased a few borders?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

*sad smile*

Longer than that my friend, that would take us back to 1949, 3 years before I was born, when England was stuffed from the effects of WWII, they still had rationing when I was born but WWII was a consequence, not the beginnings of this long period of global disorder.

You can reach back easily to the roots of WWI which begat WWII because WWI ended as stupidly as it began but the state of affairs in Europe leading to WWI was no picnic. The inter-war years were a descent into chaos and in real terms we are not progressing much towards improvement. Heinlein called one part of that period the Crazy Years but they have not ended, perhaps they wont. Some sociologists point to the planet being massively over-populated and given despite the monstrous loss of lives every year through various causes the population keeps growing it is a point that is difficult to argue.

I can't say I really agree with you about the wall. They work some places but China learned the hard way not to rely on one, so did the British with Hadrian's wall, the Maginot line did not slow Hitler down and the Berlin wall always leaked and eventually fell.

The cost is really not much of an issue, it is how effective it would be.

The entire border is already riddled with smuggler tunnels, drugs and people, the drug smugglers have progressed to DIY submarines that could as easily carry people. You have to patrol a wall anyway which is already being done quite effectively.

Trump is paranoid about illegal immigrants, truth is the U.S. economy would have been fucked ages ago without the hard working immigrants on minimum wages. I wonder how many of them work for Trump Enterprises ?

Drugs get into the U.S. or are simply grown or manufactured within the country anyway, the amount that comes across the border is but a fraction of the annual total.

It would be far more sensible for the U.S. to accept that it is a country founded upon immigration and that immigrants are the bedrock of the nation. It would also be sensible to simply legalise drugs, that war was lost long ago.

The entire bloody economy needs a good hard shake and one aspect of that would be handily facilitated by relatively unskilled labour to get manufacturing back on track, manufacturing of the type that automation can't really accomplish, new industries, not the ones already lost. America is renowned for ingenuity, time to prove it again.

Cheers

 

 

 

Edited by chrisg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×