Trump 2.0 official thread

Equation

Lieutenant General
The story sounds like bullshit. It’s like they they took bits from things you’ve heard of before to get ideas from and added them together to make a story. Anybody remember those mysterious boats off Japan where they found dead North Korean fishermen on them. Mini-subs to sneak in Navy Seals? Ever play Call of Duty? There was a scenario just like that. Ever hear before of stabbing the lungs of bodies so they don’t float in the water? Yeah if you watched the crime drama True Detective that was a way someone got rid of bodies in the water so they don’t float. Oh yeah… secret mission. They can reveal it because it wasn’t true. They’re admitting to an act of war where they accidentally committed murder of civilians instead. If the North Koreans makes fuss about it, they can just deny it happened because it’s the stuff of Hollywood. How convenient. It’s like the Chinese embassy bombing. A lot of Americans would rather admit it was intentional to cover-up that the perfect US could made a mistake. Are the North Koreans going to start a war over something that never happened? Wouldn’t you rather place this secret technology “close” to gather communications instead of figuring out some nowhere place they can slip some tall Caucasians into. If their technology didn’t need to be placed close, then why couldn’t they just place it across the border in South Korea where it would be safer? And all this just so Trump could get intel advantage of what for his meeting with Kim Jong Un for high-level nuclear talks in Hanoi that went nowhere? Shouldn't the Navy Seals have placed this equipment in Vietnam? Trump advisor Stephen Miller was responsible for information that was given out mentioning fictional equipment that was from Call of Duty. How hard is it for someone like that to dream up a fictional scenario like this? All for what? So the US can look cool?
Of course. The US and CIA needs to look cool in front of the world. Otherwise they will lose face and have a hard time recruiting for new young people into the armed services.
 

henrik

Senior Member
Registered Member
Lol who will china carry out such operations against? Moroever, China has a non interventionist policy which they rightly abide to. By contrast other powers like Tthe US,RUSSIA, UK, France, snd even regional ones like Iran,Turkey, etc etc don't have such policies so you are likely to find such clandestine operations involving this countries, though might hardly here about it.
Its good that china since Mao's death adopted a policy of non intervention and non involvement in other countries, it helps mitigate the risks of failures and consequences that might follow. Its better to avoid such intanglements and focus on economic/industrial development like China has been doing.

China should master such skills involving covert activities. Whether they will use it is another issue. They need the knowledge as other countries may perform the same covert activities on China.
 

Michael90

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So... Cold War 2.0 & Pax Americana ends, just like that? Ok then...
Well, the US has its own internal issues thst they need to address to better compete with China and other developing countries this coming decades as the developing world keeps growing . So its bad thing to also focus internally. Of course that doesn't mean the US is abondoning its pax americans doctrine or commitment entirely, far from it. It will carry on with its presence and influence globally, but priority will be at home.

On another note, TRUMP doesnt seem to be ready to give India a break until India finally picks a side for once. Funny enough i am one of the few westerners who always believed India will be a long term threat to us as well in future just like China today, so i think Trump is not actually wrong to cut India to size and make them mske concessions now that the US is still far dominant in the relationship and has all the leverage to force her will/policy over India. Its not a bad move, and i dont think we should facilitate its rise, so unfortunately for India her rise wont go under the radar and ignorantly as China dif back from the 80s to 2010s. So it will face much more restrictions, obstruction and protectionism from the West. Some interesting points i highlited and found interesting in the article about what Trump administration chief trade/commerce officisl said about India. Shows you what Trump administration thinks about New Delhi which isnt entirely wrong and Indis will have to get used to this new normal. Lol

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“They [India] are a vowel between Russia and China. If that’s who you want to be, go be it. But either support the dollar, support the US, support your biggest client, who is the American consumer, or, I guess you’re going to ban 50 per cent tariff,” he said.

"They [India] need to decide which side they want to be on. You know what’s funny is, remember the Chinese sell to us. The Indians sell to us. They’re not going to be able to sell to each other. We are the consumers of the world. People have to remember, it’s our $30 trillion economy that is the consumer of the world.



Lol
 

uguduwa

New Member
Registered Member
Well, the US has its own internal issues thst they need to address to better compete with China and other developing countries this coming decades as the developing world keeps growing . So its bad thing to also focus internally. Of course that doesn't mean the US is abondoning its pax americans doctrine or commitment entirely, far from it. It will carry on with its presence and influence globally, but priority will be at home.

On another note, TRUMP doesnt seem to be ready to give India a break until India finally picks a side for once. Funny enough i am one of the few westerners who always believed India will be a long term threat to us as well in future just like China today, so i think Trump is not actually wrong to cut India to size and make them mske concessions now that the US is still far dominant in the relationship and has all the leverage to force her will/policy over India. Its not a bad move, and i dont think we should facilitate its rise, so unfortunately for India her rise wont go under the radar and ignorantly as China dif back from the 80s to 2010s. So it will face much more restrictions, obstruction and protectionism from the West. Some interesting points i highlited and found interesting in the article about what Trump administration chief trade/commerce officisl said about India. Shows you what Trump administration thinks about New Delhi which isnt entirely wrong and Indis will have to get used to this new normal. Lol

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“They [India] are a vowel between Russia and China. If that’s who you want to be, go be it. But either support the dollar, support the US, support your biggest client, who is the American consumer, or, I guess you’re going to ban 50 per cent tariff,” he said.

"They [India] need to decide which side they want to be on. You know what’s funny is, remember the Chinese sell to us. The Indians sell to us. They’re not going to be able to sell to each other. We are the consumers of the world. People have to remember, it’s our $30 trillion economy that is the consumer of the world.



Lol
India‘s economy would improve regardleds but by pissing it off, it would surely end up being a major threat to the West. It‘s a shame because if you follow India‘s urban society, it was rapidly westernizing. In certain social circles, when it comes to values, how people dress, their goals etc. they had little differences with young westerners. Now all of that is gone to waste because of one giant toddler.

i guess when you let a retard drive a car, he would surely drive it into a wall.
 

Michael90

Junior Member
Registered Member
India‘s economy would improve regardleds but by pissing it off, it would surely end up being a major threat to the West. It‘s a shame because if you follow India‘s urban society, it was rapidly westernizing. In certain social circles, when it comes to values, how people dress, their goals etc. they had little differences with young westerners. Now all of that is gone to waste because of one giant toddler.

i guess when you let a retard drive a car, he would surely drive it into a wall.
No, i disagree. India actually will never be a US ally like the US wants to , i.e an econonic and military ally who follows US foreign policy interests globally like the E.U, Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan and others do. India sees herself as too big to be under the US or be seen to be under US as a junior partner, plus i'm not even talking about India's pride and historical tradition of natural distrust of foreign agreement and foriegn powers influence in India. So india's entire political establishment(its bipartisan and the only thing all the political groups in India agree on) and the general public(you only need to talk to Indians in general to understand this, i have because i worked a 1 year contract job for my former company in india years ago) are deeply against any sort of alliance system and see India itself as having her own interests different from the superpowers and india as her own pole power. Only those who dont understand all this still hold the ignorsnt belief that India will or could become a western/US ally the way some people think. You couldnt be more far away from the truth.

India, even as weaker and poorer as they have been in the past had been defiant of the US/West in almost every major foreign policy issue the US has faced, India has never supported any of them if you look at it closely, in fact India has often actually done the opposite if it suited her interests. To think India will suddenly change and follow the US as India grows even stronger is not rational. If anything is the opposite, the bigger and stronger India grows the more assertive of their national interest and indepedent policy they would adopt. So if the US cant get this concessions from India today when the US holds all the leverage over India(make no mistake India doesnt really have much leverage over the US) then the US wont be able to get this concessions a few decades from now when India is mich bigger economically like China today. Do you think if the US had asked for some of the trade/economic concessions from China in 2004 when China was still establishing herself as a manufacturing power , do you think China could have resisted and negotiate with the US the way they are doing today as a near peer power? Lol
 
Last edited:

uguduwa

New Member
Registered Member
No, i disagree. India actually will never be a US ally like the US wants to , i.e an econonic and military ally who follows US foreign policy interests globally like the E.U, Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan and others do. India sees herself as too big to be under the US or be seen to be under US as a junior partner, plus i'm not even talking about India's pride and historical tradition of natural distrust of foreign agreement and foriegn powers influence in India. So india's entire political establishment(its bipartisan and the only thing all the political groups in India agree on) and the general public(you only need to talk to Indians in general to understand this, i have because i worked a 1 year contract job for my former company in india years ago) are deeply against any sort of alliance system and see India itself as having her own interests different from the superpowers and india as her own pole power. Only those who dont understand all this still hold the ignorsnt belief that India will or could become a western/US ally the way some people think. You couldnt be more far away from the truth.

India, even as weaker and poorer as they have been in the past had been defiant of the US/West in almost every major foreign policy issue the US has faced, India has never supported any of them if you look at it closely, in fact India has often actually done the opposite if it suited her interests. To think India will suddenly change and follow the US as India grows even stronger is not rational. If anything is the opposite, the bigger and stronger India grows the more assertive of their national interest and indepedent policy they would adopt.
You are making a wrong assumption here. The US didn‘t want India to be a subordinate vassal state like Japan, SK or EU. As long as India wasn‘t vehemently against western interests, they were satisfied. US was also happy to use India‘s distrust of China to find some common ground. There was a reason why American diplomats tirelessly worked in the past 25 years to build a relationship with India. It‘s one thing when a giant country of India‘s size stays neutral towards the US vs if it opposes the US. Also the young people being westernized means that there would have been a chance that India in the future becomes more western in its outlook. You have older generstion not very fond of the west because of colonial hangover. But in the end of the day, we can safely ignore this possibility because Trump has destroyed any hope of India being friendly towards the west for the next 50 or so years.

Now when it comes to Trump, he doesn‘t have a strategy and doesn‘t have a clue of what he is doing. He‘s a childish, incompetent, unqualified clown who happens to lead the most powerful country on earth thinking that his reality tv show antics work for global politics. This dynamic would never not be weird to me. His first term wasn‘t much of a disaster, only because he was surrounded by qualified people at the time but this time it‘s different so you would see this administration running things to the ground and handing over global leadership to China.
 
Top