|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Titus2
Joined: 06 Sep 2015
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 7:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Titus2 wrote: |
The Trump version of the Republican Party is an enormous departure from the Bush/Romney iteration:
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-05-17/koch-brothers-give-a-megaphone-to-the-anti-israel-fringe
| Quote: |
On Wednesday, the Charles Koch Institute, a think tank funded by one of the conservative movement's most generous donors, will host a conference featuring some of the academy's most virulent foes of Israel.
Charles and David Koch, scions of the Koch Industries fortune, have always leaned libertarian in their political giving and nonprofit work. The two brothers have supported criminal-justice reform and other free-market initiatives in education and labor. In foreign policy, the Kochs have stayed away from the uglier fringes that blame Israel and its supporters for hijacking U.S. foreign policy. That is, until now.
The institute's conference scheduled for Wednesday will feature separate panels with Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, co-authors of the 2006 book "The Israel Lobby." |
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/rand-paul-new-defense-think-tank/2016/06/09/id/733130/
| Quote: |
Disciples of Rand Paul and the Koch brothers have come together to form a new defense think tank that will prioritize a strong military but with a focus on "restraint and diplomacy."
Ed King, president and founder of Defense Priorities Foundation, is the former COO of a pro-Paul super Pac; Eleanor May was Paul's campaign press secretary; William Ruger is the vice president of Policy and Research at the Charles Koch Institute, according to the group's website.
Defense Priorities' own foreign policy dictates a strong defense of the country's borders that are responsible.
"These vital interests must be weighed against the prevailing Beltway narrative that obliges U.S. military engagement in so many places and at so many times," Defense Priorities writes on its website. "Too often, these needless and exhausting ventures are undertaken absent thoughtful consideration of the consequences here at home and abroad."
|
The smallest opening and the money moves away from the war party.
No more wars for Israel (from the Republicans). The internationalist revolutionary warmongering is much more at home with progressives, from where they initially came. Adleson will throw money at Trump to ensure he keeps the MAD Israel alliance but there will be no war in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, etc for Israel, unless HRC wins (which she won't). |
To call Stephen Walt of Harvard and John Mearshiemer of U Chicago fringe is as absurd as calling them virulently anti-Isreal. Their views, realism, have been around and been mainstream for decades. This is hardly a new development or new actors. Koch money has been going to this sort of stuff for awhile, and there have always been places like Cato peddling this view.
Your last paragraph is pure speculation. Trump seems just as likely to do stupid stuff in the Middle East as Hillary is, which is very. It's hopeful thinking and a fantasy. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/25/donald-trump/donald-trumps-pants-fire-claim-he-never-discussed-/ |
W&M have been terrorized by ethnocentric Jews for a decade now. They are used to it, and those of us paying attention should understand what is going on. Watch any of their lectures where there are questions at the end and it is an endless stream of people saying their scholarship is shit or that they are bad people or that it was really those dastardly Christians etc. It must be exhausting.
Trump will not be overthrowing governments. He is inclined towards stability and not revolution. I'm reminded of the story of Bush asking his dad "what's a neo-con" ("think Israel, son" was the answer). That kind of naive idiocy is what the neo-cons thrive on. That is not Donald Trump. He knows what's going on. His foreign policy team are standard realist state-capitalist types and not internationalist revolutionaries. There will not be a Doug Feith whispering in his ear. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus2 wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Titus2 wrote: |
The Trump version of the Republican Party is an enormous departure from the Bush/Romney iteration:
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-05-17/koch-brothers-give-a-megaphone-to-the-anti-israel-fringe
| Quote: |
On Wednesday, the Charles Koch Institute, a think tank funded by one of the conservative movement's most generous donors, will host a conference featuring some of the academy's most virulent foes of Israel.
Charles and David Koch, scions of the Koch Industries fortune, have always leaned libertarian in their political giving and nonprofit work. The two brothers have supported criminal-justice reform and other free-market initiatives in education and labor. In foreign policy, the Kochs have stayed away from the uglier fringes that blame Israel and its supporters for hijacking U.S. foreign policy. That is, until now.
The institute's conference scheduled for Wednesday will feature separate panels with Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, co-authors of the 2006 book "The Israel Lobby." |
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/rand-paul-new-defense-think-tank/2016/06/09/id/733130/
| Quote: |
Disciples of Rand Paul and the Koch brothers have come together to form a new defense think tank that will prioritize a strong military but with a focus on "restraint and diplomacy."
Ed King, president and founder of Defense Priorities Foundation, is the former COO of a pro-Paul super Pac; Eleanor May was Paul's campaign press secretary; William Ruger is the vice president of Policy and Research at the Charles Koch Institute, according to the group's website.
Defense Priorities' own foreign policy dictates a strong defense of the country's borders that are responsible.
"These vital interests must be weighed against the prevailing Beltway narrative that obliges U.S. military engagement in so many places and at so many times," Defense Priorities writes on its website. "Too often, these needless and exhausting ventures are undertaken absent thoughtful consideration of the consequences here at home and abroad."
|
The smallest opening and the money moves away from the war party.
No more wars for Israel (from the Republicans). The internationalist revolutionary warmongering is much more at home with progressives, from where they initially came. Adleson will throw money at Trump to ensure he keeps the MAD Israel alliance but there will be no war in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, etc for Israel, unless HRC wins (which she won't). |
To call Stephen Walt of Harvard and John Mearshiemer of U Chicago fringe is as absurd as calling them virulently anti-Isreal. Their views, realism, have been around and been mainstream for decades. This is hardly a new development or new actors. Koch money has been going to this sort of stuff for awhile, and there have always been places like Cato peddling this view.
Your last paragraph is pure speculation. Trump seems just as likely to do stupid stuff in the Middle East as Hillary is, which is very. It's hopeful thinking and a fantasy. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/25/donald-trump/donald-trumps-pants-fire-claim-he-never-discussed-/ |
W&M have been terrorized by ethnocentric Jews for a decade now. They are used to it, and those of us paying attention should understand what is going on. Watch any of their lectures where there are questions at the end and it is an endless stream of people saying their scholarship is shit or that they are bad people or that it was really those dastardly Christians etc. It must be exhausting.
Trump will not be overthrowing governments. He is inclined towards stability and not revolution. I'm reminded of the story of Bush asking his dad "what's a neo-con" ("think Israel, son" was the answer). That kind of naive idiocy is what the neo-cons thrive on. That is not Donald Trump. He knows what's going on. His foreign policy team are standard realist state-capitalist types and not internationalist revolutionaries. There will not be a Doug Feith whispering in his ear. |
First paragraph, yes. I've seen both speak. I admire them and find criticism of them for that book grating.
Second, if he is elected I hope you a right and I am wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus2
Joined: 06 Sep 2015
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trump is exposing an intra-elite, or intra-oligarch rivalry. It is an interesting time. The Koch's moving against neo-cons, Theil ruining Gawker and Trump's "America First" is just the start. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2016 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus2 wrote: |
| Trump is exposing an intra-elite, or intra-oligarch rivalry. It is an interesting time. The Koch's moving against neo-cons, Theil ruining Gawker and Trump's "America First" is just the start. |
Why do you think this is a new phenomenon, or that it is Trump's doing? It's hardly like the American 'elite' have ever been a true monolith. The way you project meaning and your fantasies on Trump's sloganeering is no different than those people who did that for Hope and change. Libertarians have never liked neocons, the kicks and others have always funded institutes that talk about Atlas Shrugged and non-intervention. I don't get the need to connect these disparate dots to Trump. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus2
Joined: 06 Sep 2015
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2016 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Titus2 wrote: |
| Trump is exposing an intra-elite, or intra-oligarch rivalry. It is an interesting time. The Koch's moving against neo-cons, Theil ruining Gawker and Trump's "America First" is just the start. |
Why do you think this is a new phenomenon, or that it is Trump's doing? It's hardly like the American 'elite' have ever been a true monolith. The way you project meaning and your fantasies on Trump's sloganeering is no different than those people who did that for Hope and change. Libertarians have never liked neocons, the kicks and others have always funded institutes that talk about Atlas Shrugged and non-intervention. I don't get the need to connect these disparate dots to Trump. |
I do not believe I said he was creating but that he is exposing. To be more clear, his aggression is encouraging aggression. He is having an enormous impact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2016 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus2 wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Titus2 wrote: |
| Trump is exposing an intra-elite, or intra-oligarch rivalry. It is an interesting time. The Koch's moving against neo-cons, Theil ruining Gawker and Trump's "America First" is just the start. |
Why do you think this is a new phenomenon, or that it is Trump's doing? It's hardly like the American 'elite' have ever been a true monolith. The way you project meaning and your fantasies on Trump's sloganeering is no different than those people who did that for Hope and change. Libertarians have never liked neocons, the kicks and others have always funded institutes that talk about Atlas Shrugged and non-intervention. I don't get the need to connect these disparate dots to Trump. |
I do not believe I said he was creating but that he is exposing. To be more clear, his aggression is encouraging aggression. He is having an enormous impact. |
Ok, well then that is undoubtedly true. Bernie as well, but in different ways on the other side. Interesting times, for better or worse. I despise Clinton, and nothing will convince me to take Trump seriously, or libertarians for that matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2016 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus2 wrote: |
| catman wrote: |
| When it comes to foreign policy Hillary is barely any better than the hawkish Republicans who oppose her. |
Which "hawkish republicans" oppose her? Seems they all explicitly or implicitly support her.
HRC is George Bush in a pant suit. |
Like I said she is barely any better than the neo-cons.
Just like Trump is barely any better than the neo-cons. He has already kissed up to AIPAC, wants to increase US activity in the Middle East, pro-torture, and opposes the Iran deal.
Bernie Sanders was the only candidate to say no to AIPAC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is absolutely essential that Clinton be limited to four years.
As you may have heard, Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned. I am done criticizing her now, she removed herself from the situation. Nonetheless, since she acted as a Clinton pawn and quisling, there are legitimate questions about Clinton's involvement and encouragement.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/another-clinton-email-scandal/492833/
| Quote: |
The email dump jeopardizes Clinton’s ability to unify the party in Philadelphia and avoid the public fratricide that spoiled Donald Trump’s convention in Cleveland. While some of the DNC emails criticized Clinton, the overwhelming number of anti-Sanders correspondences create an indelible impression that the DNC violated its oath of neutrality.
The email story also is important because:
-This is part of a pattern that goes back decades. So righteous in their cause and paranoid of their enemies are the Clintons, that they cut corners to victory—even when, as was the case in the race against Sanders, they would likely win without shenanigans. Clinton Democrats stacked the DNC with people determined to smooth her path to the nomination.
-Another hallmark of the Clinton tradecraft is to keep a safe distance from the dirty work while others get soiled. In this case, DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced her resignation Sunday, effective later this week, pushed from the job in hopes of ending the controversy.
-Sanders and his advisers complained privately and publicly for months that the DNC was working against them. The Clinton world responded as it usually does to a political crisis: Deny the charge and attack. "Everything our fans have been saying—and they were beaten down for and called conspiracy theorists—and now it's in black and white,” Rania Batrice of the Sanders campaign told ABC News.
-Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook claimed Sunday that the leaks were part of a Russian effort to help Donald Trump. While the Russians may have hacked the DNC, there is no solid evidence that Moscow is actively trying to aid the Republican presidential candidate. Mook’s attack is brazenly hypocritical, given the fact that Clinton herself exposed U.S. secrets to electronic theft by running an off-the-books email system in violation of administration policy.
-Which raises two questions nobody can answer: Did a foreign country hack Clinton’s homebrewed server? Did her deleted emails, the thousands unrecovered by the FBI, include any embarrassing information now in the hands of another country? If the answer is yes to either one of those questions, October might come with a surprise.
-[Dumb point snipped]
-If a candidate can’t run a political convention, they’re probably not up to the challenge of running a country. Trump flunked his test in Cleveland last week. Clinton is off to a poor start. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
