Trump and the military

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,079
Reaction score
10,776
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I personally hold the idea of calling your representatives to be naive. From European experience, politicians become impressed only when a million people are marching. Because seeing the people on the streets in significant numbers scares them. But it may be a cultural difference.

Some of it may be because politicians are elected on such a local level here. Trump won't care about a bunch of people marching who, in his opinion, come from states and communities that didn't vote for him anyway and never would no matter how he behaves. A representative isn't going to be as impressed by a march in a capital city as he/she will be by a hostile town hall meeting in their own district. Maybe some senators would be scared by robust protests within their own state.

GOP representatives have been experiencing some hostile town hall meetings. So far, though, it hasn't had much effect on the way they've been voting. One problem in this country is that gerrymandered districts (in favor of the GOP at this juncture in history) have led to many representatives feeling very secure from challenges by the other party (usually Democrats these days). The biggest threat they face is actually in the primaries, because if they're not conservative enough, the relatively small number of people who show up to vote in primaries might go for someone even more polarizing.

There's also a matter of people experiencing a certain amount of protest burn out. This may not be justifiable, but I suspect a large number of us are hunkering down to see where the winds are blowing, so we know how a protest should be organized and focused.

Should we protest to get Trump impeached, or to remind our legislators that there are checks and balances they should all be employing, in spite of their party? Should we protest to scare Trump into thinking that he's not going to be re-elected if he continues down the path he's on (as if he'd believe that)? Should we protest to let everyone and anyone know how scared we are of getting into a major war that could cost many south Korean (and possibly American and other allies) lives, or at least screw up our economy and alienate ourselves from our allies?
 
Last edited:

Twick

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
3,291
Reaction score
715
Location
Canada
Also, the powers of the president are different than those of European leaders. And I don't think *any* amount of public protest, short of actually having a mob seize him, would affect Trump. He's not right, as I've said before, and logic and persuasion have little effect on him. He's not playing the long game, like most politicians.
 

CathleenT

I write
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 6, 2014
Messages
5,097
Reaction score
1,981
Location
Northern California
Well, FWIW, I emailed my senators, Diane Feinstein and Kamala Harris. This was the text of my email.

Dear Senator (Feinstein or Harris),


I'm afraid over the escalation of the situation between our country and North Korea. Is there anything that can be done about this, preferably before something irrevocable happens? Can the inquiries into President Trump's past activities be somehow fast-tracked, so that if there is a legal cause to remove him from office, it can be done without delay? Or is there any other course of action that would serve?


Also, is there any course of action you would recommend to concerned citizens?


Thanks so much for your time and attention in this matter,


Cathleen Townsend

***

Feinstein has always emailed me back, although I don't know about Harris yet (she's new). Anyway, would anyone be interested in reading the replies? I'd be happy to pass them on here.
 

JJ Litke

People are not wearing enough hats
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
7,997
Reaction score
4,475
Location
Austin
Website
www.jjlitke.com
Remind me again, why is no one out in the streets and protesting in the USA? From over here, it looks like you guys are asleep or frozen like a rabbit in the headlights. Most Americans didn't vote for him, he is spewing threats and nonsense, where is the protest? The time of laughing at him is over. And internet posts do nothing.

Where are Obama, Clinton and Sanders? Why are they not out and inspiring and organizing protest?

You're dancing at the edge of the RYFW rule--Respect Your Fellow Writer. All of that has been and continues to happen, whether you see it or not, and I don't care for your implications that we aren't doing enough.
 
Last edited:

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,820
Location
Australia.
From European experience,

Well, quite. But it's always a good thing to remember that there are people from all over the world on this board, bringing all sorts of different and valid experiences and viewpoints with them, so although a question is a wonderful thing to ask, an assumption about how things should be managed because in my country we'd manage it this way, is not very useful.

As I am constantly saying (in my head, not out loud because I'm generally sweet and old fashioned about these things) :granny: YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY HEMISPHERE ON THE PLANET, YOU GUYS!
 
Last edited:

Lyv

I meant to do that.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
1,934
Location
Outside Boston
Two nights ago, I attended a candidate's night for city councilors. There, I saw my state senator who recognized me both by sight and name. So did several of the candidates and elected officials. I didn't want to go, as I am recovering from surgery, but I went, because when you're lucky enough to live in a place where candidates and elected officials show up for something as small as a Q&A at a neighborhood association beach, you encourage and reward it. But also because I know my reps and they know me, and I want to make sure that continues. When I contact them about a city issue, I am a person they know pleading my case (I know some of their staff, too, which can be immensely helpful). And some will rise to higher office.

I attend hearings and meetings and town halls when I can, and I write and call (those things do have impact) and I protest when I can. I also post on the Internet, which, in a variety of ways, helps me do the other things. I don't take a break from this stuff, haven't for 40 years (it's in my blood; my grandmother was known for marching into his office and giving then-state rep John Fitzgerald Kennedy a piece of her mind from time to time). Taking to the the streets isn't the only way, and a lot of us are using multiple tools in our resistance toolbox.
 

Prozyan

Are you one, Herbert?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
657
Location
Nuevo Mexico
I'd like America to hold its shit together enough to not stumble into another war. I'd like to sleep well at night.

I'd worry more about NK myself. Trump just tweets and runs his mouth.

The bellicose rhetoric is unhelpful and disturbing, but it seems highly unlikely it will actually lead to armed conflict

Rugcat is exactly right.

NK, on the other hand,is the one threatening to launch "test missles" at Guam to hit waters just 25 miles from the island. I would be more concerned about that rather than anything Trump says. If that happens, things are not going to go so well.
 

Helix

socially distancing
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
11,695
Reaction score
12,079
Location
Atherton Tablelands
Website
snailseyeview.medium.com
I'd worry more about NK myself. Trump just tweets and runs his mouth.

Rugcat is exactly right.

NK, on the other hand,is the one threatening to launch "test missles" at Guam to hit waters just 25 miles from the island. I would be more concerned about that rather than anything Trump says. If that happens, things are not going to go so well.

Trump ordered the drop of a MOAB -- the largest non-nuclear explosive weapon -- in Afghanistan and the press applauded him. That's not exactly going to dampen his enthusiasm for mass destruction.

And don't forget that only one nation has actually used nuclear weapons on its enemies.
 

Prozyan

Are you one, Herbert?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
657
Location
Nuevo Mexico
And don't forget that only one nation has actually used nuclear weapons on its enemies.

That statement is not only old and cliched, it is pointless.

I guess hitting the trifecta is worth something. Maybe.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
Kim Jong Un is unstable, to say the least. But he is also cunning – he doesn't do things at random or out of sheer craziness.

He understands perfectly well that were he to actually launch an attack on the US or any of its territories or allies, the US would reply instantly with military force and bring his regime to an end. That would be true no matter who was the president.

No US president, of course, would launch a preemptive attack – with the possible exception of Donald Trump. But even Trump, and certainly the officials around him, understand how insane it would be to launch a preemptive attack. China has just weighed in, announcing that a preemptive attack by the US would cause them to side with North Korea, whereas if North Korea initiated an attack they would stay out of things.

I can see the US preemptively trying to blow up North Korea's missile program, but military experts have weighed in and said that is simply not possible. So any attempt would achieve nothing except arouse the enmity of China and US allies as well.

So neither side is going to start shooting. That would be terrible for either country. The one thing that this escalation of tension will bring about is to bolster the determination North Korea has to ramp up their nuclear program -- they see it as the ultimate deterrent. Of course, they weren't about to drop their nuclear program in any case.
 

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
8,555
Reaction score
8,433
Location
The Seattle suburbs
Website
www.reneedominick.com
So neither side is going to start shooting. That would be terrible for either country.

Pretty definitive. I hope you're right. Meanwhile, people like Malcom Nance aren't so sanguine

PERSPECTIVE: Trumps threats now bets lives of 24 million ppl. Seoul-10 Mil,Tokyo-13 Mil,Anch AK 290k, Seattle 740k & +100k soldiers & citz

Trump put a military option on the table with Venezuela today, too. Venezuela, who recently received a major influx of cash (2.8 billion) from his buddies at Goldman Sachs, Venezuela, who is no threat to us, only to its own people. Trump is desperate to wag the dog, and if he isn't stopped, he will have us fighting everywhere.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
Pretty definitive. I hope you're right. Meanwhile, people like Malcom Nance aren't so sanguine
Of course no one can say anything definitively. There's always a chance of something terrible happening. But I think in reality the chances of war with North Korea are extremely slim. Barely possible, but just barely.

On the other hand, I think US military action somewhere else in the world is quite likely. You'll notice that the Russia investigation hasn't been mentioned much in the news the last few days. If we were to invade say, Grenada, that's all people would be talking about, and don't think Trump doesn't understand that.

There might even be some pointless skirmishes around the edges of North Korea. But nuclear war? Not gonna happen.
 

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,772
Reaction score
6,477
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
From how I see the situation, the bulk of our population doesn't feel the threat of any actual military aggression between the US and NK.

The heath care repeal did see a significant public protest. And it was enough, just barely, but repeal did not pass. We're in a protesting holding pattern at the moment. There are frequent protests being organized all over the country that the news media is doing little to cover. Tomorrow there are several town meetings scheduled with legislators all over the country.

One thing to keep in mind, whether you are in this country or in other countries is that the bulk of what one is seeing here is through the news media filter and our mainstream news media is more about selling their commodity than they are about informing the public as to actual news. Currently hype about Trump's Tweets and NK's growing nuclear threat sells news. The actual situation may not be quite as bad as the hype.

On the other hand, we've never had an unpredictable pathologic narcissist as POTUS before. And the alt-right extremists spouting off to him about conspiracy theories and encouraging fascism are a known unknown, to use Rumsfeld's terminology.

Then there is Kim Jung Un who just as unpredictable. We do know Kim has a food crisis threatening his power, or not. Could be it only threatens the peasants in the countryside and with how thoroughly the totalitarian thumb presses down on that country, unless food shortages reach Pyongyang, it may not be as bad for Kim as it looks.

I think we can believe China is interested in keeping NK stable.

The next move is Kim's.

- - - Updated - - -

Mr Trump already happened.

Touché.
 

CathleenT

I write
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 6, 2014
Messages
5,097
Reaction score
1,981
Location
Northern California
I really hope rugcat is right. This situation just reminds me so much of the bad old days, when we all put our faith in the insane acronym MAD (mutual assured destruction).

I thought we'd left those days behind for good. Now we're being dragged back into fear, all so two *insert word of choice here* can beat their chests and feel manly or whatever.
 
Last edited:

Twick

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
3,291
Reaction score
715
Location
Canada
From a sheerly selfish, "I want to see tomorrow" sort of viewpoint, I'd rather see him turn to Venezuela than North Korea. At least we wouldn't destroy the whole freaking world over it. But still, would anyone other than his base be distracted? One can argue that NK is going to be a problem at some point that has to be dealt with, but only the most gullible would think that Venezuela is a significant threat to U.S. world security. I know that this describes his hardcore base, but they're not the ones he has to distract from the Mueller probe, it's everyone else.

I'm hoping that the Chinese message to NK that if they try to attack the U.S. they're on their own will have some effect as well.
 

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
Kim Jong Un is unstable, to say the least. But he is also cunning – he doesn't do things at random or out of sheer craziness.

He understands perfectly well that were he to actually launch an attack on the US or any of its territories or allies, the US would reply instantly with military force and bring his regime to an end. That would be true no matter who was the president.

No US president, of course, would launch a preemptive attack – with the possible exception of Donald Trump. But even Trump, and certainly the officials around him, understand how insane it would be to launch a preemptive attack. China has just weighed in, announcing that a preemptive attack by the US would cause them to side with North Korea, whereas if North Korea initiated an attack they would stay out of things.

I can see the US preemptively trying to blow up North Korea's missile program, but military experts have weighed in and said that is simply not possible. So any attempt would achieve nothing except arouse the enmity of China and US allies as well.

So neither side is going to start shooting. That would be terrible for either country. The one thing that this escalation of tension will bring about is to bolster the determination North Korea has to ramp up their nuclear program -- they see it as the ultimate deterrent. Of course, they weren't about to drop their nuclear program in any case.

I don't think betting on Trump understanding much of anything is a safe bet, frankly.

I don't believe he's considering things, or playing out scenarios, or thinking anything through. I think he acts on absolute impulse, guided mainly by what's come into his consciousness in the 30-second window before he speaks or acts.

Which would be one thing, if he did not have control of nuclear weapons.

Would the U.S. launch a preemptive strike against NK? Of course not, to what end? It'd accomplish nothing, serve no goal, only do harm and destabilize the world for no purpose.

Would Trump? Who the fuck knows, and no one can stop him if he feels like doing it one random minute.
 

Twick

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
3,291
Reaction score
715
Location
Canada
cornflake - exactly! You can see from things like Tillerson's comments. The grownups are trying to calm everything down. "Of course we're not about to go nuclear. We're not idiots. Seriously, we know this would be a bad thing." But Trump's camp went out of their way to attack Tillerson.

There's probably no one in Washington who wants to see a nuclear war. Except Trump.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,079
Reaction score
10,776
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
That be fantastic if Trump's Twitter account was blocked.

Given how vindictive #45 is, it's hard to see Twitter taking a stand against him. They rarely stand up to the garden-variety bullies and trolls that harass people every day, but I've had many fantasies about them doing just this.
 

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,772
Reaction score
6,477
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
Given how vindictive #45 is, it's hard to see Twitter taking a stand against him. They rarely stand up to the garden-variety bullies and trolls that harass people every day, but I've had many fantasies about them doing just this.

I was just day dreaming. My POV is Twitter won't ban Trump because he's a huge draw for them.