Politics

psu_dad
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Politics

Postby psu_dad » Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:44 pm

Then on Friday the NFL was literally put in an impossible position by the President when he decided to make some incendiary remarks in order to score a few cheap political points.

He trolled them and they took the bait. They should have ignored him. This isn't a first amendment issue. Trump wasn't acting in an official capacity. He has no authority here. He was just another social media knucklehead putting in his two cents.

But speaking as POTUS can have serious, even devastating, repercussions.

Such as when?

tempe
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:54 pm

Re: Politics

Postby tempe » Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:58 pm

Since Trump.
Ask me in the bomb shelter for further explanation.

psu_dad
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Politics

Postby psu_dad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:07 am

I lived through the Cold War. You want inflammatory rhetoric? Here you go, courtesy of Nikita Khrushchev: "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you." Plus we had regular drills in elementary school where we schlepped down to the basement to hide from the impending nukes.

Nothing happened.

More than one person has pointed out to me that a big-mouth POTUS can have dangerous/devastating repercussions, as if this is some Eternal & Indisputable Truth. And when I respond with the simple question "Such as when?", I usually get a blank stare. What I usually don't get are examples.

LioninVa
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 11:49 am

Re: Politics

Postby LioninVa » Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:10 am

Well _dad, we had elected leaders who allowed for calmer head to prevail when the Soviets were parking nukes within a stones throw of Miami. I don't know, but assume that there were other instances of the doomsday clock being ticks away from going off and calmer heads prevailed. We are probably better off not knowing. Obviously, we will not have a historical perspective until this current fiasco is over, and I hope you are correct. But I can't help but wonder just how far this asshat will go to attempt diversions away from his personal and political concerns.

psu_dad
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Politics

Postby psu_dad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:36 am

During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy didn't do a Mr. Rogers impersonation and assure the world that it was just a silly misunderstanding while playing Kumbaya on an acoustic guitar. He made a televised speech to the nation indicating that our stance was that any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere would be treated as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States ... and he made it clear that we would retaliate by nuking the Soviet Union into the Stone Age.

LioninVa
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 11:49 am

Re: Politics

Postby LioninVa » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:47 am

I am thinking you need to get more sleep or something, _dad, because your response started off with criticism against nothing I said or implied. I said calmer heads prevailed, not that we backed down peacefully with or without a guitar and Kumbaya moment. I don't know how you got there.

Anyway, here is the potential difference... Kennedy was a decorated war hero who understood the sacrifices while Trump is, well ... not. If I wanted to be more specific, I could call him a draft dodger who kind of thinks not getting a venereal disease was his Vietnam (not that I am sure he escaped unscathed based on his incoherence, but that's a different discussion). I don't know much about Kruschev, but I believe he was a little more progressive that the average Communist leadership; not that that means much but he did advance their space program. I am not implying that he was a good guy or anything like that, but I think he knew the realities of mutually assured destruction. I can't say the same for Kim Jong-un. He, like our leader, has a need to win and does not ever admit defeat. This is a Crazy Stew that could easily go bad.

psu_dad
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Politics

Postby psu_dad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:30 am

I am thinking you need to get more sleep or something, _dad

I'm good there. I work from home now. I can nap whenever I feel like it. Is this a great country, or what?

As for my point, it was that I see no compelling body of evidence that inflammatory rhetoric from a POTUS = Impending Doom. I just see people accepting that premise without evidence. There was ample inflammatory rhetoric during the Cold War.

I acknowledge the obvious difference between Kennedy and President Knucklehead. But I believe the single biggest factor for the hysteria surrounding his presidency is that the MSM and the Hillary disciples hate him with the Intensity of the Sun. They are not backing down from their pre-election prediction that a Trump presidency would produce a Zombie Apocalypse, they're doubling down on it.

PS - Kruschev was a friggin lunatic.

Blue&White
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:41 am

I'm not sure you are drawing the right conclusions from history. We came dangerously close to war with the Soviets during the Cuban missile crises. It was clear headed thinking and understanding of all the issues that allowed Kennedy to steer us through that episode. And, he did that with a hawkish military that was basically clamoring for us to attack. I think Kennedy is generally overrated as a President, but his handling of the Cuban missile crises is definitely praiseworthy. Someone without that cool head could have lead us into disaster.

As for the impact of presidential rhetoric, I think you're understating it's potential impact. Bellicose statements from Reagan in the 80s pushed the Soviets to up their military spending beyond what was sustainable and forced their collapse. George W. Bush's "axis of evil" reference in the 2002 State of the Union had 2 specific impacts: 1) the US was undergoing secret diplomatic negotiations with Iran at that time that focused on reestablishing normalized relationships between the 2 countries and Iran getting actively involved with the US in the fight against al queda and stopping support of terrorism into Israel - and those discussions came to a screeching halt because the Iranians pulled out immediately after; and 2) North Korea doubled down on its nuclear program and that was the where the big push for them to have nuclear weapons originated. Forget all the rhetoric you hear now about how it's all Hilary Clinton and Obama's fault that the little lunatic has nukes. It was George W. Bush who really kicked off that effort.

I agree with you that the constant caterwauling from the media and hard left that everything Trump says and does is going to have catastrophic impacts and bring about the end of the world has gotten beyond ridiculous. But, that doesn't mean his words and actions as President are irrelevant and he can't do real damage to this country, both in the near term and the long term. Pushing us into a confrontation with a regime like North Korea is a very dangerous game to play. Just because elements of the media and the hard left are crying about an impending nuclear confrontation doesn't mean it can't happen. I think you are understating the impact and the power his office holds and the potential for him to cause real damage and real problems that have real implications.

psu_dad
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Politics

Postby psu_dad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:54 am

I think you are understating the impact and the power his office holds and the potential for him to cause real damage and real problems that have real implications.

I believe he can cause real problems with inappropriate actions. But he hasn't done anything yet, other than release a lot of hot air. I don't see compelling evidence that he can cause real problems just by being a blowhard twitter troll. Time will tell, I suppose.

Crowbar
Posts: 168
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Politics

Postby Crowbar » Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:56 am

I could go back from roughly October 2001 to March 2003 and find many statements from GWB saying Iraq's WMD program was a grave threat and they could hit us in 45 minutes or so, if Saddam Hussein chose. This rhetoric, in conjunction with the backdrop of 9/11, led us to war with Iraq.

How did that work out?