World Affairs

[Dreadnought 8,226]

3 hours ago, Sabretooth78 said:

More like the Dunce of DC.  The Charlatan of Columbia.  And it's not for a shortage of alternatives, either.

Trump just wanted the job to show Obama he could get it -- and to show Hilary that he could beat her.

Now he's finding that the job comes complete with a built-in "hot seat" !

BEING President is much harder than hosting a second-rate reality TV show !!

As Michael Douglas once said ..."It's ALL about character" -- and Donnie's 15 minutes ARE up!

[Fantozzi 4,067]

Elections in germany: black canditate is victim of racist attacks from ultra-right saying a black person representing germany is treason of the german people, including shitstorm on facebook.

I wonder if they say the same about coloured players in the national soccer team?

[Dreadnought 8,226]

8 hours ago, Fantozzi said:

Elections in germany: black canditate is victim of racist attacks from ultra-right saying a black person representing germany is treason of the german people, including shitstorm on facebook.

I wonder if they say the same about coloured players in the national soccer team?

I sometimes wonder about all this talk about how we are living in the 21st Century -- yet, we still suffer with these periodic outbreaks of racial and ethnic persecution that date back to a time when "nations", as such, did not even exist.

And I have to live with the fact that in my own country, we elected a man that -- almost single-handed -- managed to manufacture and "sell" the "Birther Myth".

[Ocram's Razr 963]

Good news! China has backed down from building roads in the Doklam region of Bhutan and both India and China have removed troops from the area.

 

r1VgwOSAUEM (youtube)

 

Here is a funny little video that explains the situation. It's at least as credible as MSNBC while not taking itself too seriously.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41281050

North Korea is now capable of attacking not only its neighbors but also Guam. China says the USA needs to be less aggressive and still hasn't changed its dialogue of staying out of the conflict if North Korea attacks first.

[Dreadnought 8,226]

All I gotta say about this, is that the little jerk is gonna keep shooting stuff until he finally causes someone to shoot back !

I'm just glad I don't live on the west coast.  If he drops one west of the Rockies -- I might avoid being contaminated from the fallout until it makes it's way back around the world.

[Fantozzi 4,067]

Elections in germany: Merkel looses 8,5 percent mostly to ulta right AfD (just two weeks ago their candidate, Alexander Gauland said, germans shold be proud of the 'Wehrmacht') - with 33 percent still strongest but has to find partners to form gouvernement. So influence of other parties will grow stronger on german's next gouvernement. As all probable partners except of FDP, 10,7% (33 + 10 = 43, so which isn't enough to form gouvernement just in two) are anti-Trump or even anti-american and NATO-sceptical it's probably next foreign minister will be by courtesy of one of these parties. It's very unlikely Merkel will have enough power to rule on this staffing. As it's a tradition - if you do a coalition the cancelor comes from one party and the foreign minster comes from the other party. In a coalition you most unlikely will have cancelor and foreign minister from the same party. 

[Dreadnought 8,226]

@Fantozzi

My congratulations to the Chancellor !

From looking at your graph -- I presume to hope that the Foreign Minister will not be nominated from the "AFD' Party.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

North Korea claims The D'ump's tweets amounted to a declaration of war but have yet to commit any new actions that would be considered breaking the armistice. Sure, this was all started by missile tests but there seems to be a certain level of calm reached.

[Dreadnought 8,226]

@OcramsRzr

Don't hold your breath --

Kim has to avenge Trump's last insulting remarks -- no doubt the plan is already in motion.

AND -- if Kim doesn't move, Trump will.  He has to keep the unwashed masses entertained with his blustering.  Or -- he might need a diversion from the Russia investigations -- or his new plan to give more tax money to the rich while cutting services to the poor and middle class.

[Odainsaker 2,133]

Of course, North Korea has been repeatedly declaring and re-declaring war on the U.S. ever since the shooting war ended in 1953, so, like the Boy Who Cried Wolf, the world has gotten used to shrugging off North Korean crazy talk.  That was until the U.S. got its own crazy-talking leader, and in the space of a few months we've gone from daring them to fire missiles at Guam, threats at the podium of the UN General Assembly to "totally destroy" North Korea, to now counter-threats of a test detonation of an ICBM-launched thermonuclear weapon over the Pacific.  We're not even a year into this White House yet and we have already had our second nuclear war scare based on a flippant comment.  Is the new strategy working?

Rocket Man Glorious Leader, Shining Sun, and Supreme Commander Marshall Kim Jong-un says:

Quote

I’d like to advise Trump to exercise prudence in selecting words and to be considerate of whom he speaks to when making a speech in front of the world.  The mentally deranged behavior of the U.S. president openly expressing on the U.N. arena the unethical will to “totally destroy” a sovereign state, beyond the boundary of threats of regime change or overturn of social system, makes even those with normal thinking faculty think about discretion and composure.

 

You know we are in trouble when the dictator of the DPRK sounds like the sane, adult one...

 

Quote

I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire.

...err, nevermind.

 

Actually, what really matters is this line:

Quote

His remarks which described the U.S. option through straightforward expression of his will have convinced me, rather than frightening or stopping me, that the path I chose is correct and that it is the one I have to follow to the last.

Consider the other regimes that have given up or been thwarted in their attempts to gain nuclear weapons:  Nazi Germany gutted, Imperial Japan nuked, Iraq invaded, Syria bombed, Libya overthrown, Apartheid South Africa toppled, Belarus chained, Kazakhstan shackled, Ukraine dismembered.  Iran has made an agreement regarding its nuclear program, and even though Iran has actually been certified by the Trump Administration as being in compliance with the terms of the agreement, the Trump Administration is expected to renounce the deal anyway and resume an unpredictable confrontation.  Any hardline leader looking at this pattern would reasonably think that the best way to avoid destruction, revolution, or even execution is to jealously guard their nuclear weapons stockpile and to swiftly race to the finish on an ICBM delivery system as the ultimate deterrent to outside-pressured regime change.  Kim Jong-un has just told us this, and now that they know they can absolutely never give up their nuclear deterrence, what is the endgame that doesn't end in Nuclear Apocalypse?

The two words "totally destroy" has sealed the deal.  Well done, Mr. President.

 

[matias93 7,535]

2 hours ago, Odainsaker said:

Any hardline leader looking at this pattern would reasonably think that the best way to avoid destruction, revolution, or even execution is to jealously guard their nuclear weapons stockpile and to swiftly race to the finish on an ICBM delivery system as the ultimate deterrent to outside-pressured regime change.

T H I S

2 hours ago, Odainsaker said:

The two words "totally destroy" has sealed the deal.  Well done, Mr. President.

But not this. Why? Because even if from the inside of the US, Trump appears as particularly ham-fisted at foreign policy, from the outside, it is just another US president giving reasons (by words or actions) to distrust their compromise with political stability on the rest of the world. Trump hasn't created more insecurity on the global stage, but only made it more evident; is the continuous US policy of acting as the supreme judge of the rightness of all other governments the one that creates such insecurity since the times of the Monroe Doctrine.

[LexusInfernus 908]

8 hours ago, matias93 said:

But not this. Why? Because even if from the inside of the US, Trump appears as particularly ham-fisted at foreign policy, from the outside, it is just another US president giving reasons (by words or actions) to distrust their compromise with political stability on the rest of the world. Trump hasn't created more insecurity on the global stage, but only made it more evident; is the continuous US policy of acting as the supreme judge of the rightness of all other governments the one that creates such insecurity since the times of the Monroe Doctrine.

Actually no. Trump has made the world less safe. Because Trump is constantly demonstrating that he is not someone you can make a deal with and trust him to uphold his end of said deal. Iran made a deal, Iran is complying to the terms of the deal, yet under Trump, the US is ready to drop the deal. The world made a deal about climate change, the world is trying to uphold its end of the deal. Yet Trump thinks the deal is dumb and does away with it. 

The US is no longer the trustworthy businesspartner it once was. You can't make a deal with them anymore. Because Trump and the Republicans in general have demonstrated that they have no qualms with dishonoring every deal or law their predecessor has made. Trump has started a trend where each new president will spend the first few months of their term in office to demolish whatever the previous guy made. Including international deals and treaties. 

On top of all that, the US itself is no longer safe or stable. Trump has given voice to people who should have remained without a voice. In doing so, he is further polarizing the country. The more the US becomes a state of opposites, the more dysfunctional their governance becomes which feeds into the polarization of society. At some point, Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Progressives will no longer be able to live together in the same nation. Then its only a matter of time before one side decides that having the other side around becomes unacceptable and that they need to be purged. A second Civil War is becoming a more likely scenario each day with Trump in office. The possibility of the US falling apart into several smaller states is also a more realistic scenario. 

[Sabretooth78 808]

1 hour ago, LexusInfernus said:

Because Trump is constantly demonstrating that he is not someone you can make a deal with and trust him to uphold his end of said deal.

This is nothing new, and those of us who don't partake in this country's socialized thought processes and other cancerous nationalistic jingoist crap have seen it all along.  Look at the long line of dishonesty, bankruptcies and otherwise scams this man has been party to since God-knows-when and you wonder how this man has ever had any credibility to begin with.  Makes me wonder (without being interested enough to actually research it, in part because I don't like wasting thought on him) what his father was like (you know, the one who actually made the family fortune) and what he'd think of all this.

Personally, if I had never known him before I'd have doubts just based on his stupid-sounding last name, but that's just my own petty bias.  But it does happen nevertheless to actually be a book you can judge by its cover.

Hey, Houston, have you seen that $1 million yet?  LOL

Makes me almost want to see what would happen if (or should I say when) the US did split up and the "red" heartland states ended up in a poor, backwards, and what would be a pariah nation with little value-added industry and rapidly depopulating urban centers.  Would these idiots still kiss the ground he walks on?  Still spout rhetoric about individual freedom whilst wholeheartedly submitting to a personality cult?  If that doesn't put the moron in oxymoron, I'm out of ideas as to what does.

[Fantozzi 4,067]

1 hour ago, Sabretooth78 said:

Look at the long line of dishonesty, bankruptcies and otherwise scams this man has been party to since God-knows-when and you wonder how this man has ever had any credibility to begin with.

He was elected by a majority of the american people making the promise to 'drain the swamp'. Now he poors even some muddy waters into the north korean swamp.

Seems to me history of politics is to drain a swamp to create another somewhere else. I remember someone made a deduction from Murphy's law saying: "to get something clean you have to get something else dirty. But you can make many things dirty without cleaning something."

Someone should explain that to those other 51% of the american people. Thinking you can make war at people without being at war with them. "Oh, we just did a little war talking. Oh, we just poked around with our army. We clean the world up and nothing becomes dirty. Shure thing."

 

[Sabretooth78 808]

Well, to set things straight, as I've seen (according to Wikipedia) there was 55.5% voter turnout.  So in real terms, 44.5% of American voters voted for nobody (which is a valid choice for one seeking an improvement) and only 25.6% voted for a certain narcissistic baboon.   So in essence, he placed 3rd in a race of two.  (I think that sums him up quite elegantly.)  I was one of the 2.8% who recognize the problem with this country (namely the democrat-republican hegemony that chokes the entire political process) and tried to do something about it, but as is typical in the US, stupidity is rewarded and even encouraged.  Case in point.

Which brings us back to Jong-un-lite's "swamp-draining."  If you consider stuffing those positions with the same people who created the problems as "draining the swamp", then yes he has done so.  More neoliberal conservatism at work for you.  If they were related it would be pure nepotism.  And of course, the "staunch individualists" who adore his every move will say he has drained the swamp just because he says he has, so there's no point in even arguing with them.  When those policies bite themselves in the rear, they'll thank him for it and plead for another.  You can't argue with these people, they're too far gone and you have to let them go.  You're better off spending that time feeding ducks.  (But isn't he kissing the Saudis' feet just as much as Obama did?  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!  Why, have you not heard, it's OK now!!!)

Although, let's allow the proposition to be true, that he has indeed "drained the swamp."  Good.  Guess what happens to your city next to that former swamp when a hurricane, or heck, just normal seasonal rainfall shows up at your doorstep.  If it could just hold off until my popcorn is ready, thanks.  Swamps have a way of recharging themselves, or as you said, moving somewhere else (such as engulfing a city).

Still waiting for the popcorn; it's really stubborn.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

3 hours ago, Fantozzi said:

He was elected by a majority of the american people making the promise to 'drain the swamp'. Now he poors even some muddy waters into the north korean swamp.

Seems to me history of politics is to drain a swamp to create another somewhere else. I remember someone made a deduction from Murphy's law saying: "to get something clean you have to get something else dirty. But you can make many things dirty without cleaning something."

Someone should explain that to those other 51% of the american people. Thinking you can make war at people without being at war with them. "Oh, we just did a little war talking. Oh, we just poked around with our army. We clean the world up and nothing becomes dirty. Shure thing.

6

He lost the popular vote (46.1% of votes vs 48.2% for Hilary) and there was moderate by US standards (low by democratic standards) voter turnout (Sabretooth says 55.5%). The majority of electoral points went to The D'ump even though only about 25.6% of American voters voted for him. Think about that. It only takes 1/4 of eligible voters to win. If more progressive voters in swing states voted, Hilary would have won a narrow electoral margin and a decent popular margin. This was the 3rd time in history this happened (previous was when George Bush Jr won).

 

I'm sure a civil war is brewing. One that will only be prevented by Democrats taking over by the traditional, democratic means. However, there is a time limit. If Republicans have the majority in either house of Congress after the midterm elections and The D'ump starts a war with any kind of draft (including backdoor, which GWB used), it will be too late to peacefully turn our once great nation around. Iran and North Korea are probable wars.

 

I used to vote for whomever I thought was most qualified, but with most blue state Republicans siding with The D'ump, I cannot take chances: I will vote exclusively for Democrats for all partisan positions until The D'ump is no longer president. I pray he will get impeached because that means the American Taxpayers won't have to waste money on him anymore (secret service is expensive).

  Edited September 29, 2017 by OcramsRzr  
I cannot remove the '6' added by Grammarly for the amount of errors in Fantozzi's quote

[Sabretooth78 808]

democrats are complicit in this by nominating the Old Hag instead of the popular outsider in Sanders.  Conversely, republicans are complicit in allowing the orange-utan to hijack their party and then instantly succumbing to Stockholm Syndrome (easy when your spine has been surgically removed).

Nearly all problems can be traced to the collusion between these "two" parties just as they also obstruct meaningful solutions to them.  Look no further than the two pathological liars they selected for us.

[Dreadnought 8,226]

There is a tiny, tiny, glimmer of hope --

The Republicans keep trying to pass various pieces of legislation that will ultimately hurt the poor and middle class of the nation.  If this continues -- they will either succeed and decimate a large part of his voter base -- or the Democrats will succeed in proving to the "rugged individualists" that Conservative Republicans can be detrimental to their health.  In either situation -- Trump will likely lose control of the House and Senate in 2018 midterm elections.

And if we don't succeed in impeaching Trump sooner -- maybe Bernie will run again in 2020. 

Meanwhile -- he will continue to scare the world to death while doing damage to the fabric of this country.

Unfortunately -- the "Lee Harvey Oswalds" of this country probably voted for the A** !

[Sabretooth78 808]

46 minutes ago, Dreadnought said:

And if we don't succeed in impeaching Trump sooner -- maybe Bernie will run again in 2020. 

Interesting to think about that, and after all, shouldn't the next election cycle be well underway already?

At this point I'm suspecting it'll come down what Andrew Cuomo does.  I don't care for him either, but at least he is proving himself somewhat able to capably manage something larger than a toupee, and for whatever reason, Upstate NY isn't quite the same economic morass it has been for the better part of the last 50 years.  Whether I would vote for him over another libertarian just to protest the republicans, probably not.  Cuomo is, I believe, fairly popular so as a resident of NYS I can probably vote for anybody with little consequence.  I could see Sanders making some noise again, but despite his resemblance to Skeletor, Cuomo does seem to appear far more palatable and trustworthy than the Old Hag.  Either way, this will be the boring side of the circus.

What will be entertaining, as usual, will be the republican primary.  Rather than following the recent trend of various "flavors of the week" throughout the season, this one looks to be a sh*tshow of epic proportions as our heroes nominally struggle between supporting the incumbent they deep down really can't stand (full well realizing they haven't spine enough to field someone who actually has a legitimate chance at winning an election, something we'll not have seen in 4 cycles), fielding somebody anyway, and then retracting, lather, rinse and repeat; all the while Paul Ryan will pledge to sit on the winner's lap, whoever that may be.  Or, in an alternate universe where republicans travel to see the Wizard only to find out that they had a spine all along, they'll hang The Rump out to dry a la Nixon long before 2019 and Pence will be the unchallenged incumbent.

Pence vs. Cuomo would be a good matchup of opposing ideologies but just might be a good, clean fight.  While I don't like him, I respect Pence as a decent straight shooter.  Cuomo, on the other hand, I don't know.  He pretty much didn't have to do anything to get elected governor by virtue of running against Carl Paladino.  One of those "just keep quiet and let him keep screwing up" sort of affairs.  Sort of the same mentality the Allies had in the European theatre against Hitler.  Which brings us full circle back to Trump while keeping this on the thread of "World" affairs.

[Dreadnought 8,226]

2 hours ago, Sabretooth78 said:

Pence vs. Cuomo would be a good matchup of opposing ideologies but just might be a good, clean fight.  While I don't like him, I respect Pence as a decent straight shooter.

  Which brings us full circle back to Trump while keeping this on the thread of "World" affairs.

When the dust settles, you may find Pence's political career among the casualties.

He has backed his lord and master to the hilt -- defending the indefensible at every turn.  And is tainted with the powerful odor of hypocrisy.  We may also find out that he knows, or has done, more than he should.  You don't honestly think Trump has been smart enough (all on his own) to get this far, do you? 

Ryan could wind up in the Oval Office. 

Jeeze --!  They need to install a revolving door at the White House. 

It seems Sec. Price has resigned this afternoon -- apparently an "expensive" case of jet-lag !!    

Unfortunately -- Trump is a valid subject for world affairs.  Every time he opens his mouth to lie, he demonstrates his incredible capacity for stupidity -- and it scares the "real" World leaders out of their wits.

If he was the Grand Duke of Liechtenstein nobody would give a rat's patoot ! 

I'm holding out for Bernie -- the old boy still has fire in his belly !

[LexusInfernus 908]

3 hours ago, Dreadnought said:

There is a tiny, tiny, glimmer of hope --

The Republicans keep trying to pass various pieces of legislation that will ultimately hurt the poor and middle class of the nation.  If this continues -- they will either succeed and decimate a large part of his voter base -- or the Democrats will succeed in proving to the "rugged individualists" that Conservative Republicans can be detrimental to their health.  In either situation -- Trump will likely lose control of the House and Senate in 2018 midterm elections.

If Trump somehow manages to pass all the legislation he wants, he will no doubt hurt his voter base. And then he will deflect all blame onto the Democrats while also stirring up more racial resentment. Because thats how Republicans have done it for decades and thats how Republicans have gotten away with screwing over their own voter base for decades. There is no hope to be had there. 

Besides, with no viable Democratic alternative, its much more likely that voters simply replace Republicans with even more extreme Republicans. 

9 hours ago, Sabretooth78 said:

This is nothing new, and those of us who don't partake in this country's socialized thought processes and other cancerous nationalistic jingoist crap have seen it all along. 

Yes, and normally it gets taken into account that a democracy elects someone who is not ideal to the position of ultimate leadership of a country. But electing someone who is so unhinged, who is so utterly unqualified on every conceivable level and that despite the fact that this was obvious to almost everyone outside the United States, points to a systemic problem within the United States. A normal, functional democracy does not allow this to happen, there would be to many institutional checks and balances that would make it impossible for someone like Trump to get elected. Yet it did happen and that means that not just the current administration is unreliable, ALL future administrations have become inherently unreliable. The assumption that American democracy will produce a reasonable president has been proven incorrect. And because of that, we can no longer make safe deals with the United States. From now on, each administration will first have to prove that they are not unreliable idiots before we make a deal with them and we will now always have to keep in mind that whatever deal we make, it could be swept off the table as soon as the next president takes over. The US government is from this point forward an unreliable and uncertain long term investment. 

The fact that New York and California are now both actively looking to make international deals on their own and pursue their own national and international policy is writing on the wall. If the US federal government doesn't get its act together soon, the US will have a hard time keeping the union together. 

[Dreadnought 8,226]

1 hour ago, LexusInfernus said:

 

The fact that New York and California are now both actively looking to make international deals on their own and pursue their own national and international policy is writing on the wall. If the US federal government doesn't get its act together soon, the US will have a hard time keeping the union together. 

I wouldn't get too excited about this second civil war theory of yours.

We manage to survive -- and we'll survive "Donald Chump" as well.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

I'm not so sure. I had multiple predictions for each candidate and all new information/developments supports the civil war scenario and only some of it supports the peaceful decline scenario. Nothing supports making America great again though I predicted Bernie to be likeliest candidate to bring us to 1950s prosperity & happiness and pre-crack northern/union states racial equality (yes, the northern states have become worse since Nixon (though the Southern states are worse) and I believe refer madness and the crack-cocaine epidemic to have been started by Republicans).

I believe a civil war is imminent because I believe succession attempts will be met with force.

[LexusInfernus 908]

10 hours ago, Dreadnought said:

I wouldn't get too excited about this second civil war theory of yours.

We manage to survive -- and we'll survive "Donald Chump" as well.

Its not a matter of survival, its a matter of how Americans look at each other. And more importantly, how they look at other points of view. 

Democracy can only work when all sides are willing to work together through compromise. But in todays politics, compromise is seen as weakness, as working with 'the enemy'. Its become all or nothing, either you get what you want or you burn the house to the ground. Its why people like Ted Cruz get all giddy and excited when they get the chance to shut the government down, because its a way of showing that they are absolutely not gonna compromise. This all or nothing approach is fed by an electorate that thinks in us vs them terms. Its liberals against conservatives, democrats against republicans. This makes compromise impossible because doing that is essentially betraying your own voter base, and if you are compromising, its all to easy for rivals to paint you as being weak and ready to give 'the other side' what they want. That costs politicians their job and since they all love their job, they are unwilling to appear 'weak'. So you get a dysfunctional political system where nothing gets done and everything that does get done gets reversed as soon as the other side gains the temporary advantage, this again feeds into the us vs them narrative in the electorate. 

And as the us vs them narrative gets stronger and more dominant each day, Americans will have trouble looking at their neighbors and seeing them as Americans first. Where it used to be that Democrats and Republicans could live next to each other and respect each others differences because in the end they are both American citizens, they will now start to see 'the other'. The enemy. The root cause of all thats bad in America. Democrats see a bunch of racist, xenophobic, sexist, homophobic, science denying, bible thumping, ignorant, corporate stooge, poor hating rednecks when they look at Republicans. Republicans see a bunch of America hating, preachy, arrogant, godless, welfare dependent, immoral, tree hugging, weak, whiny professional victims when they look at Democrats. Both sides think of each other as a danger to the safety and prosperity of America. And because of that, its very plausible that if things don't get turned around, one side decides in the not so far away future that its best if they got rid of the other side. Or one side starts to think the other side is plotting against them and decide they have to act first.

Conservatives have already alluded to 'second amendement remedies'  and the NRA commercials aren't exactly subtle when it comes to who they see as the problem in the United States. And on left leaning sites and forums, you see more and more comments that show the users don't really see Democrats and Republicans as compatible with each other in the same nation. And with a president that actively stirs up racial resentment, that actively promotes the us vs them narrative, how long until comments turn into action? How long before the people now just talking about wanting to get rid of the other side actually pick up a gun or get into their car and put their threats into action? Don't forget, we already had a Dylan Roof and that fascist that plowed his car into a crowd of people. And on the other side we already saw a bunch of people attacking 'white people' because of racial resentment. These people did what they did exactly because they have so completely bought into the us vs them narrative that they decided the other side has to go. Sure, for now its lone acts of terrorism and hate crime. But they could just be the vanguard of what is to come.  

The US is slowly turning into a powder keg and if things don't change, that powder keg will be filled to the brim and then set alight. 

[Fantozzi 4,067]

Let me do an example. There is a farmer and he thinks, the stronger his convictions are and his believe in the things he doing, the better the crops will grow. So he isn't able to understand that changing convictions, changing believe and trying different things may do the trick. He uses phosphates and they don't help. So he thinks, I must be more focused on the usage, I must use them better - better planning, better spreading. And he buys better machines. Instead of changing strategy he only tries to refine the only strategy he has more and more. That's a shure way to become ideological.

But with ideology crops won't grow. Even David Hamilton can't run his car only with ideolgy - but he has to make decissions on each turn - he can't make an ideology on how to drive through turns because every turn is different and he has to observe and react and parameters and conditions change while ideology is something rigid.

The more incertain times are the more people are seeking for stable structures and while flexibility and adaptablity is needed - they tend to refer on ideology instead. Ideology promises security - to trust in america, in germany, in poland, not to let our contries change by foreigners, by strange forces - ideology is lke a shelter in incertain times.

So people tend to react wrong. While change is mostly the solution they are afraid of and they tend to vote for those saying: we will reverse change, we will go back to the gold old state, we will go back to good old values - to charcoal industry and diesel  instead of electricity and microchips.

The same the famer. If his ideology doesn't work and he sees the fields suffering - exactly then, when he needs a change for a new strategy, he will seek for thinks he can trust in trust, the good old phosphates. He reproduces his believe again - and at the end, instead of changing something he repeats only what he always did.

It clearly would help if neighbours would sit together, smoke a pipe on the veranda, watching the sunsets and to see that ideology is nice hobby but nothing to keep a farm running. They are more like tools and you have to change tools until you found one that fits.

All this persistance on one ideology being right or wrong - it's like to persists a screwdriver is the best tool for all and everything.

Mankind was more successfull than other animals to cultivate the planet because of flexibility and adaptability. Not by being the first to have a conviction. To make the strategy fitting the situation - not to lament on the situation not fitting my ideology.

That's what happening I think. People making ideology the place where they are save and that offers security. Instead it's not. It's a secure place to fail when future brings in new tasks. I always used a screwdriver - why not using the screwdriver on genetics too?

They think they can drive their cars with ideology. But you can't - you have to observe and to react. And when you going with 200 mph there is no time for ideology. You have to react and you have to react the right way or you stick at the wall. In todays politics there is no time for ideology. And what do they do instead? Making ideology great again. How wrong, how sad.

Trump is the best example for this farmer. He sees the phosphates don't work so he throws more phosphates on his field. A classical money-thinker he is. He throws money in a project. It doesn't work. So what you do? Throw more money in. You can't win in Korea - so what you do? Throw more soldiers in.

It's so easy to become a prisoner of your own idears. Therefore it's important, really important what @LexusInfernus says. We should always try talking with each other to overcome our own ideologies. Not to defend them. This is the game were you gain. And you gain something precious - freedom. As you get rid of your prison this way.

 

Me, I never understood why I should be limited to one religion. Why can't I be a christian and a jew. And a hindu. I mean - in suprmarket you were allowed only to choose one sort of cheese?????? Why? What is it good for to choose only one if you can taste all of them?

What are you afraid off? Why do we create a world ful of wonders and than limit ourself to only a few of them? Can't understand this.

Did you ever try t be a democratic republican? Or a republic democrat? Or with your heart in France and with your mind in Norway? Or something like this? A colourfull animal instead of a grey one? A multisexual, universal.

I mean, once in kindegarden, there was a play. And I was an actor. I had to be a mushroom. Well, I can be even a mushroom, if I try!

Or ... at least ... once I could. When I was a child.

So maybe I shold try to be a trout. You are american? You are a muslim? That's nice. Me, I'm a trout. I mean - it's my conviction - I'm a troutishian.

 

[Fantozzi 4,067]

Most of the characters of the star wars saga are immigrants or refugees or displaced people. Displaced by the imperial storm troopers.

Everbody would give shelter to Luke Skywalker. Maybe because he's blond? No? 

Would you? Why?

[Ocram's Razr 963]

http://thehill.com/opinion/international/371051-venezuelas-dire-state-makes-the-great-depression-look-like-a-mild

 

Venezuela is in a death spiral and many are predicting a new Marshall Plan to rebuild Venezuela after the chavistas are ousted.

[Lucario Boricua 7,027]

1 minute ago, Lucario Boricua said:

Governor of Puerto Rico, Ricardo Rosselló Nevares, declares his resignation effective on Friday, August 2, 2019 by 5:00pm. This was just the day before the impeachment started and after 12 days of the most massive protests in Puerto Rico, ever, with 550,000 people at the main protest venue and many others elsewhere in Puerto Rico and worldwide during a march on last Monday.

 

Governor during his resignation message, 40 minutes ago...

Source: La Fortaleza official Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/fortalezaproficial

 

Super massive protests on July 22nd, 2019

Source: http://rickyrenuncia.com/

 

Protests in Old San Juan, on the street leading to Palacio Santa Catalina or La Fortaleza, the official mansion of the governor of Puerto Rico.

Source: NotiCel

[Dreadnought 8,226]

@Lucario Boricua

I really don't think he had much of a choice in the matter.  To his credit......he did not try to lie his way out of it (like some politicians we know).  And he obviously rejected any ideas of maintaining his position through the use of force.

It may be a new, and better beginning for them...God Knows Puerto Rico needs to catch a break.