What's new

US Politics

You are doing exactly what you accused @T-72 of doing in post#1999.

Not at all. I am not getting sucked into a Trump v. Clinton 'discussion' (which by definition isn't solvable, because it involves making a choice for one or the other candidate, which is what the US electorate will be doing, and people here have their opinions set)

As I clearly pointed out, I'm not interested in swaying your 'vote' one way or another, as it is pointless to do so with non-US people. After all, only US people get to vote on this. However, I do think there is an information warfare element and I do think it important to point that out. GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF NON-DEFENCE RELATED PROPAGANDA SPEWED ON THIS FORUM.

And that is MY opinion, which I have already shared with forum management, which invited me here in ... oh, sometime around 2006 ... probably because I post so poorly.

But you aren't require to listen or agree.

So, tada!
 
Add to that his suspicious financial dealings with the Russian banks on which we know little. I believe those deals may have given him a positive view of the Russians & their mindset.
link ?

Add to that his being surrounded by people like Paul Manafort,Roger Stone,Gen. Micheal Flynn(he appeared on Russia Today-a regime mouthpiece many times) etc
Paul Manafort, from what I gathered was actually working against Putin/Russia's interests in Ukraine by helping them with the EU (which in itself was shady business, so he stepped away to take some heat off). I could be wrong here too, so let me know, I haven't looked into any big details of Manafort's dealings in the Ukraine etc.

Stone is a political operative for the right, worked with Reagan and Nixon, what's his deal ? His and Alex Jones' run in with Cenk at the RNC was hilarious.

Gen Flynn was fired by Obama for not being politically correct, look his bio up, that guy knows what he's talking about, and is about as far as you can get from being a traitor to the US.

Afterall there is a reason why many Republican National Security experts & policymakers have endorsed Hillary Clinton. Trump will only help secure Russian power in Syria & Ukraine.
many prominent Bushites and neo cons have endorsed her, because their doctrine fits right in with her.




There is unbelievable hypocrisy in this whole Russia narrative about Trump now, 8 years ago when Obama said he wants to stop the wars the world lauded him as some sort of messiah of peace, and Trump is painted as a Russian agent as he tries to avert WW3 :what:
 
LMAO looks like the Democrats ahev completely lost it and are going full conspiracy nutjobs. On top of that this moron is a Democrat Campaign Strategist and he believes the KGB still exists. Someone needs to break it to this fool that the KGB was dissolved in 1991. Guy sounds like a classic example of a red neck.


CRS INSIGHT
Information Warfare: Russian Activities

September 2, 2016 (IN10563)
Catherine A. Theohary, Specialist in National Security Policy and Information Operations (ctheohary@crs.loc.gov, 7-
0844)
Kathleen J. McInnis, Analyst in International Security (kmcinnis@crs.loc.gov, 7-1416)
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IN10563.pdf

Note the .GOV adresses!

"the U.S. intelligence community has blamed the Russian government for attempting to interfere in U.S. elections by hacking and leaking documents."
http://www.bankinfosecurity.com/us-government-accuses-russia-election-hacking-a-9442
Not the democrats...

Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security
Release Date: October 7, 2016
The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07...omeland-security-and-office-director-national

haha, love it, the wheels are coming off crooked hillary's cart. Saw the pundits at morning Joe earlier, the new clinton strategy now is apparently one to attack Comey relentlessly till election day hoping that he crumbles. They failed to mention this would involve taking their eye off the ball and that Trump will more wiggle room to take his message to the masses unobstructed, she's collapsed in the polls, even rigging them by oversampling wont work now. Comey, for his part, will not only be defended every step of the way by the republican establishment, he also has legit cover (not enough time left in the week to go through all 650k of them)

mashallah, It's all coming together quite beautifully for Trump. :-)

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/28/us-e...-with-a-lot-of-people-in-india-and-china.html

It's a partisan article, that one line just happens to illuminate it perfectly. No, Hillary hasn't harmed India while in public office, not to my knowledge anyway but I must make clear that my support for Trump and general commentary here on this election has absolutely nothing to do with how the outcome might impact India-US ties which are irrelevant in the context of the race anyway.

There are much bigger issues at hand here, such as the situation in Syria/Iraq and growing military tension between the US and Russia. Trump is proposing a detente in the face of rapidly declining relations and the festering proxy mess that is Syria, he realizes that an escalation in Syria will only lead to disaster, common sense pragmatism right there, a sharp (and welcome) contrast to crooked hillary's disastrous no fly zone idea.
There Is a No-Fly Zone in Syria—One Russia Created
http://observer.com/2016/10/there-is-a-no-fly-zone-in-syria-one-russia-created/
 
not getting sucked into a Trump v. Clinton 'discussion'
but this isn't exclusively a discussion about Trump vs Clinton, the personalities. All I'm interested in is the geopolitical fallout (military situation wise in particular) from the American people's verdict.

you like skirting around stuff, so I'll just ask you this directly, are you opposed to Trump's proposed détente with Russia ?
 
Not at all. I am not getting sucked into a Trump v. Clinton 'discussion' (which by definition isn't solvable, because it involves making a choice for one or the other candidate, which is what the US electorate will be doing, and people here have their opinions set)

As I clearly pointed out, I'm not interested in swaying your 'vote' one way or another, as it is pointless to do so with non-US people. After all, only US people get to vote on this. However, I do think there is an information warfare element and I do think it important to point that out. GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF NON-DEFENCE RELATED PROPAGANDA SPEWED ON THIS FORUM.

And that is MY opinion, which I have already shared with forum management, which invited me here in ... oh, sometime around 2006 ... probably because I post so poorly.

But you aren't require to listen or agree.

So, tada!

What is your nationality if you dont mind ?
 
CRS INSIGHT
Information Warfare: Russian Activities

September 2, 2016 (IN10563)
Catherine A. Theohary, Specialist in National Security Policy and Information Operations (ctheohary@crs.loc.gov, 7-
0844)
Kathleen J. McInnis, Analyst in International Security (kmcinnis@crs.loc.gov, 7-1416)
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IN10563.pdf

Note the .GOV adresses!

"the U.S. intelligence community has blamed the Russian government for attempting to interfere in U.S. elections by hacking and leaking documents."
http://www.bankinfosecurity.com/us-government-accuses-russia-election-hacking-a-9442
Not the democrats...

Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security
Release Date: October 7, 2016
The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07...omeland-security-and-office-director-national



http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/28/us-e...-with-a-lot-of-people-in-india-and-china.html


There Is a No-Fly Zone in Syria—One Russia Created
http://observer.com/2016/10/there-is-a-no-fly-zone-in-syria-one-russia-created/

And yet there is no proof the KGB (which no longer exists except in the minds of Democrats) controls the FBI or the Republicans and thus revealing Clinton Corruption. Just peculation.
 
Last edited:
We do not care what 'The world' thinks of our politics. You want Americans not to even opine on other countries' internal politics ? Then have the courtesy to not even opine about ours. But if you chose to opine, then do not bring in 'The world'.

Anyway...What you think 'The world' said is nothing but a rehash of what 'The world' said of Ronald Raygun. You never had any respect for US with Raygun. And look what happened to the Soviets and 'The world'. Under Raygun, we changed 'The world', pal. To put it bluntly, we made 'The world' our bttch...!!! Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, and Gorbachev. In the end, Uncle Sam bent them all over and BONED them one by one. You think we give a shit on what 'The world' thinks of US after that ? :lol:

LOL he doesn't care about what the world thinks, but is using capitals and bold fonts to scream his lungs out. What a desperation and humiliation.

I dare you elect Trump. Just elect him and see what a laughing stock you become infront of the entire world. You do care. You care obsessively and you know it. Otherwise, you wouldn't be reacting so angrily to my post.

If this is what Trump has turned your country into during the elections one can only imagine what a racist and xenophobic crap hole it will be after the elections. Even dead heroic soldiers aren't spared. You deserve him every bit. Now just do us all a favor and elect this maniac. I can't wait for Putin to own the US in his back pocket. Putin is a fvcking genius.
 
Last edited:
There are many reasons why I like Trump, but this whole anti-muslim thing around him has nothing to do with it, I also don't care about his wall, his views on abortion, gun control or his tax plan etc :rolleyes:

but, since you sort of brought it up, I always thought that the "muslim ban" was an atrocious idea, but because we know how things work in the US, it was always going to be an unenforceable rule, and he has since walked it back.. multiple redundant democracy ftw.. also, their democracy is the best, it has tremendous fairness.
its-ok-fingers-sign.png


I like Trump because:

He called out the Bushes and the neocons for their failings in Iraq, he was brutal, singlehandedly destroyed that dynasty at that epic debate, he went where even democrats had only dared to tread lightly and slayed the beast.

8-)

He's not afraid of or beholden to foreign special interests and calls it like he sees it, on Turkey here, and has flayed the Saudis many times for their cultural practices and on issues dealing with women and gays, his outreach to the gay community, nevermind that it was a politically expedient thing to do, it was still unprecedented for a republican, so he's not a religious zealot by any stretch.

He'll have no trouble reigning in regional troublemaker minions like the Turks and Sauds should he decide to get serious and solve the Syrian issue.

Also extremely under-reported is how many times he's regretted and rued the great loss of life, on the other side in the US's senseless wars in the middle east, Libya, Iraq, Syria.. all disaster zones, Egypt would have been one too if she'd had her way.

so India or muslims etc has nothing to do with it as far as I'm concerned, but for the sake of our planet, Trump must win.

I've followed this campaign right from the start and watched hundreds of his rallies right from the primaries, what an amazing journey, steamrolling every single expert and pundit on the way, and now our hero must win ! :partay:
 
Last edited:
The million dollar question is, why won't Trump release his taxes, what the hell is he hiding, could it be his business deals with Russia?

Here is an interesting fact, except for Trump, every Democrat/Republican nominee for the past 40 years has released their tax returns. Yeah, right, he's going to make America great again. It's time. Mr. Puppet release your taxes!

Hillary has released her tax returns from 2000 to 2015. Link


What Trump’s Tax Returns Could Tell Us About His Dealings with Russia


In the wake of Harry Reid’s accusations, it’s critical to America’s national security for Trump to open up.

By Norman Eisen and Richard W. Painter

October 31, 2016

Over the weekend, as controversy raged over FBI Director James Comey’s letter to Congress about Anthony Weiner's laptop, Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway responded by calling for “full disclosure and transparency, honesty and immediacy.”

That same standard should be applied by Trump to an issue he himself has avoided for months: his tax returns and what they might say about his dealings and holdings overseas. For the past four decades, every other presidential candidate has released his or her returns. Only Trump has refused.

And make no mistake: This is now a major national security issue, especially in light of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s extraordinary allegation, in a letter of his own to the embattled Comey, that “in my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government.”

Trump says his tax returns reveal nothing that is not already disclosed on his official candidate financial disclosure, called Form 278e. As ethics counsels to the past two presidents, we dealt with both their tax filings and their Form 278's and so we know that Trump is wrong. His tax filings have an enormous amount of additional information which, in this case, could be critically important to determining whether his business overseas might affect his decision-making as president. That is because Trump’s 12,000-page tax return may tell us a great deal about his Russian and other foreign business ties that is not on his 104-page campaign financial disclosure. It’s now more vital than ever that we get that information in light of Trump's embrace of Russian hacking, leaking and interference in our election.

If the public saw Trump's taxes, we could check his Russia connections for ourselves. That should start with the troubling discrepancies in how he and his closest associates talk about his Russia ties. Trump has claimed, for example, that “the reason they blame Russia [for hacking into Democratic emails] is they are trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know about Russia, but not about the inner workings. I have no business there and no loans from Russia. I have a great balance sheet.” But that’s very different from the claims that the Trump Organization was making before he decided to run for president. Trump's son said in 2008 that “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets” and “we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”

Trump’s tax returns could reconcile the tension between these statements. Even if Trump really does have no loans from Russia and no business in that jurisdiction, what about other financial connections with Russians outside of their land? His statement does not rule out such ties, including shared partnership interests, equity interests, joint ventures or licensing agreements with Russia or Russians—both by Trump and his affiliated companies.

More broadly there is the issue of Trump’s business dealings around the world. U.S. tax filers with financial dealings outside the country are required to provide detailed information about their foreign business activity to the IRS.

If we had Trump's tax returns, the documents could, for example, allow closer scrutiny of the widespread foreign deals licensing his name for projects and products. The needed vetting is not only a matter of who the foreign licensors are (including participants in partnerships and firms doing the licensing). It also concerns the critical question whether he is using offshore tax havens to own these licensing assets or shelter income from them. In his foreign licensing deals, Trump emphasizes the importance of political connections, Vanity Fair reported in August. “The nice part [of the licensing model] is you have local people, local developers: they know the government, they know the presidents of the country, the prime ministers of the country, and all of those things,” Trump said. “Now, I help them a lot: If they need zoning, and they say they are doing a Trump job, every single time they get their zoning because the government wants Trump.”

There are other problems with Trump's sole reliance on his 104-page campaign disclosure under the current circumstances. That document may be missing some foreign entities with which he is associated because of exclusions: The 278e need not show assets with losses, for example, if they no longer have a positive value. Given the way Trump does business, there may be many such assets that do show up on his tax returns, and that could reflect Russian or other foreign ties.

One other shortcoming of the campaign disclosure: It is a current report, which doesn’t go back before the reporting period. That period varies for the different parts of the 278e report, but is generally no longer than the preceding calendar year or two. By contrast, Hillary Clinton has provided 38 years of her tax filings. Given the heightened scrutiny called for by Trump's extraordinary statements about Russia, don't we need to know if he had Russian business dealings three or more years ago and what those dealings were?

Trump may counter these questions by asserting that his taxes contain no such information. But should we take his word for it, given his apparent support for Russian criminal meddling in our democratic process? Clinton did not ask people to trust her assertions of what was on her tax filings; she disclosed them. So has every other recent presidential candidate. Ronald Reagan’s adage for arms negotiations with the Soviets two decades ago was “trust but verify.”

Perhaps it is time for voters of all political persuasions to tell Trump the same thing that Reagan told Mikhail Gorbachev: no verification, no deal. Link
 
You should be his spokesman :D No my friend, he did not say a word about “gov't fixes its immigrant screening issues”, that speech clearly showed his hatred for Muslims and their religion.

"...Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life."​

I didn't present what I wrote as an exact quote, did I? I think I presented a fair summary of this statement in its given context.

....on numerous occasions ADL has condemned Trump, and they have also accused Trump for not strongly distancing himself from the racists.
Yes, indeed! There's a lot to criticize about Trump.

Bty, remember, you denied that the Star of David/Hillary tweet was anti-Jewish.

“The ADL immediately recognized it as an anti-Semitic image, and there was this trifecta of symbols — the Jewish star, next to a political leader, on a pile of money — referencing age-old stereotypes of Jews and money and Jews and government control,”​

I had to look twice to realize that. They may simply have chosen the six-pointed star to fit the words inside, you know. So they get a one-time pass for ignorance - no apology necessary. Question is, once the ADL educated the Trump campaign about this, did they ever employ this or a similar ad a second time?

“We’re not calling Trump an anti-Semite or a bigot, and we know we cannot control who supports him,” Bannett continued, “but his campaign has emboldened white supremacists and he needs to make it clear that bigotry and hate has no place in his campaign...​

Yes, Trump has emboldened white supremacists. Part of that is the biased anti-Trump reporting, concentrating not on Trump but the extremists among supporters.. (I think I posted an example of how at least one of these was given the boot during a campaign rally.) No, Trump isn't going to "renounce bigotry" because such an un-nuanced wide call on the political stage would undermine his immigration-weeding agenda, whereas if he qualified it he would undermine supporters who like Trump because "he tells it like it is" - not that what Trump says is necessarily fact, but that it isn't wishy-washy. (They're wrong: Trump contradicts himself instead.)


. He must say with the exact same passion that he uses to attack his opponent and to attack the media that hate will never make America great again.”
A very worthy call. I'll point out, however, that those who have crossed Hillary or her more militant supporters realize that hatred is very much a part of the Clinton campaign. "Deplorables", anyone?


In the Jewish community, we know all too well what can happen when a particular religious group is singled out for stereotyping and scapegoating. We also know that this country must not give into fear by turning its back on its fundamental values, even at a time of great crisis. As we have said so many times, to do otherwise signals to the terrorists that they are winning the battle against democracy and freedom.
True, but this is the 21st century, not the late 1930s. There is essentially no well-functioning system to filter out militant immigrants, as existed even before immigration was restricted in the 1920s - back then it was anarchists, if I recall correctly.
 
Im fookin loving it!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/01/donald-trump-polls-lead-hillary-clinton-campaign

"A senior Clinton campaign official says a new ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll which put Trump one point ahead is ‘not what we see at all’"

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

So when the heavily stacked democrat-skewed polls cant hold back the Trump wave anymore....its a case of "not what we see at all".

All 100% accurate and true when the rigging was doing its job earlier. Damn I think Trump is in for a pretty crazy landslide here to get hildabeest campaign panic-talking against their own rigged MSM polls in the most dumb way possible!

Then this little gem at the end:

“We’ve been able to raise a lot of money and it’s the last week to spend it. So you’ll see us spending in a lot of states where we haven’t.”

Guess they are worried about even the "blue" states now (given they have only spent on swing states and "vulnerable" red states (in their minds) so far).
 
but this isn't exclusively a discussion about Trump vs Clinton, the personalities. All I'm interested in is the geopolitical fallout (military situation wise in particular) from the American people's verdict.

you like skirting around stuff, so I'll just ask you this directly, are you opposed to Trump's proposed détente with Russia ?
Oh, so, because I want to talk about something other than you, I skirt things? My, my. You asking this is like me asking you "have you stopped beating your wife? - answer yes or no.

It is none of your business nor relevant what I think of either candidate. But if you look at the upcoming election in the US you have to ask of either candidate, what Is (s)he actual proposing v Russia? And will (s)he deliver upon election? Who advises them? What is their actual track record (as opposed to popular belief about it) ?

Hotspots: Support Russia, but with strings attached. (Jul 2000)
Foreign policy: Support NATO, but it's not us against Russia. (Aug 2015)
Diplomacy & respect crucial to our relationship with Russia. (Sep 2015)
Middle East: Good that Russia is involved in Syria. (Oct 2015)
Middle East: Let Russia bash ISIS; let Germany defend Ukraine. (Nov 2015)
Middle East: Let Russia make moves in Syria; it's a quagmire. (Nov 2015)
Snowden was a spy; if Russia respected us, they'd deport him. (Mar 2016)
Hotspots: Russia wants to defeat ISIS as badly as we do; work together. (Sep 2016)
Hotspots: Condemn Russian & any country's involvement in our elections. (Oct 2016)
http://www.ontheissues.org/Donald_Trump.htm

Focus on BRICs: Brazil, Russia, India, China, & South Africa. (Jun 2012)
Contain Russia or Putin will expand beyond Crimea. (Apr 2014)
Putin wants to reassert Russia's dominance in its own areas. (Jun 2014)
2012: Take a harder line with Russia's Putin. (Jun 2014)
Putin's annexing Crimea plays outdated zero-sum game. (Jun 2014)
Push Russia on press freedom; they've killed 20 journalists. (Jun 2014)
Russian reset: Pushed Obama to keep Putin at a distance. (Jun 2014)
We're already involved in Syria; deal with Russia there. (Oct 2015)
We won't have to shoot down Russians in Syrian no-fly zone. (Dec 2015)
Need more European contribution to defending against Russia. (Feb 2016)
Cooperate with Russia when possible & stand up when needed. (Oct 2016)
Unprecedented Russian interference in presidential election. (Oct 2016)
http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm

As a European, from a very small country, I'm all for detente with Russia. Heck, I'm for detente with every country. How can you not be? But - and this is a lesson of WW2 in Europe - it's not and cannot never a one way street. And I trust either candidate and campaign promises as far as I can throw them.

What is your nationality if you dont mind ?
maxresdefault.jpg


http://www.expatica.com/nl/about/30-facts-about-the-Netherlands_108857.html

And yet there is no proof the KGB (which no longer exists except in the minds of Democrats) hacked any of the emails revealing Clinton Corruption. Just peculation.
Yet somehow, I have more trust in the US Intelligence community's judgement than yours.

Indeed, since KGB was succeeded by FSK, which then became FSB, there is no longer KGB. The two major structural components of the former KGB that remain administratively independent of the FSB are the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) and the State Guards (FSO). The FSB combines functions and powers similar to those exercised by the United States FBI National Security Branch, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Federal Protective Service, the National Security Agency (NSA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection, United States Coast Guard, and partly the Drug Enforcement Administration. The FSB head answers directly to the RF president and the FSB director is the RF president's appointment, though he is a member of the RF government which is headed by the Chairman of Government; he also, ex officio, is a permanent member of the Security Council of Russia presided over by the president and chairman of the National Anti-terrorism Committee of Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Security_Service
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom