Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[palsch]

I meant more like two planes accidentially colliding, something that would be considered a minor incident and a misunderstanding. The usual diplomatic channels that help manage that aren't manned, or aren't functioning well, to my understanding.
...
We just haven't had any major incidents happen yet, and it's inevitable for one to happen at some point. How many did Obama have? (rhetorical question)

Answering anyway. Obama had his first stand off with China in March of his first year. Bush faced exactly the scenario you mentioned above - two planes collided with 24 US airmen and their plane seized - in April 2001. That one took 11 days to negotiate their return.

EDIT: Fixed link.

Also can't remember if I or anyone else posted this one, but it is a good piece on the incoherence of Trump's foreign policy. I'm going to quote it at length because seeing all the examples listed out that like that really hammers the point home for me;

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The problem is, no one really knows if Pence speaks for the administration on foreign policy—or, for that matter, if anyone does. Policy is, at its core, a function of what the government does and what it says. While it is too soon for the Trump administration to have done much, what is being said is either nothing or completely contradictory things. Pence’s message about shared values was undercut both before and minutes after his remarks by President Trump, with his latest tweets attacking the mainstream media as “fake news” and, more outrageously, “the enemy of the American people.”

There are many more such examples of incoherence, on virtually every major issue:

On Russia, leaving aside (to the extent that is possible) the cataclysmic hacking scandal and the Trump team’s potential collusion in it, it is hard to say what U.S. policy is at the moment. The president and his counselor Kellyanne Conway say the administration will at least consider easing U.S. sanctions on Russia, which were put in place in response to destabilizing actions in Ukraine that have, if anything, only escalated. But Nikki Haley, Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations, said the sanctions will remain in place until Russia meets its commitments to help end the Ukraine crisis. Meanwhile, the president alternately muses about a kinder, gentler relationship with President Vladimir Putin and then contemplates shooting a Russian ship “out of the water”—in the same press conference, no less. To heap further confusion onto this mess of contradictions, Defense Secretary James Mattis said during his confirmation that any list of top threats to the United States “starts with Russia.”

On Israel, Trump made a confounding, Dr. Seussian statement about the peace process—“I'm looking at one state and two state and I like the one that both parties like”—while standing next to a bemused Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Did that mean, as many news accounts suggested, that he abandoned the longstanding U.S. commitment to Palestinian statehood? Was he simply saying, in true dealmaker fashion, that what’s good enough for the Israelis and the Palestinians is good enough for him? Was it a throwaway line to save Netanyahu some political heartburn back at home? Leave it to Haley to again clean up for (or contradict) the president the next day, telling reporters, “the two-state solution is what we support.” Then there is the contortionist act performed under oath by Trump’s acerbic nominee for ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, a pro-settlement activist who has referred to left-leaning Jews as “worse than Kapos,” a.k.a. the Jews who aided the Nazis during the Holocaust, because they urge Israel to make concessions for peace. During an apologetic hearing on Thursday, he called the two-state solution “the best possibility for peace in the region.”

Parsing the Trump administration’s views on Israeli settlements is no easier. Press Secretary Sean Spicer has said “we don’t believe they are an impediment to peace,” that they are “not helpful” and that the administration “has not taken an official position”—all in a single statement. Trump, for his part, told a right-wing Israeli newspaper, “I am not somebody that believes that going forward with these settlements is a good thing for peace.” A few days later, he suggested to Netanyahu, with cameras rolling, that he may want “hold off on settlements for a bit.” Netanyahu’s facial expression suggested: On the other hand, I might not.

On Iran, the Trump administration clearly does not like the nuclear deal (“worst agreement ever negotiated” is a popular refrain), while reportedly reassuring European partners, who were part of those negotiations, that he plans to uphold it. They don’t much like the Iranian government either. Before he resigned 24 days into his tenure after lying to the vice president, Trump’s national security adviser put Iran “on notice,” without offering any explanation at all as to what that means or what the consequences might be. “The statement stands for itself,” an administration official told baffled reporters on background. “Iran clearly understands that there was a communication today to get their attention.” No doubt they understand that much. But to what end? The administration isn’t offering any more information about its Iran policy publicly, nor is there any evidence they are clarifying things privately with Iranian officials, which might help avoid an unintended conflict.

On Syria, Trump and the departed Michael Flynn clearly think it is a good idea to work with Russia to fight the Islamic State—after all, that was the main excuse Flynn offered for his myriad conversations with Russian officials. But Mattis ruled out such cooperation until Russia can “prove itself” willing to abide by international law. Trump has also long touted his opposition to U.S. intervention in Middle Eastern conflicts, usually in the context of falsely claiming to have opposed the Iraq war before the invasion. Then on Wednesday, a leak from the Pentagon indicated the administration is considering a major deployment of ground troops to Syria. What about the underlying civil war between the regime and opposition that is responsible for the lion’s share of killing and humanitarian devastation? No clear position or role so far—the Trump team told the State Department’s Syria experts not to attend the most recent peace talks in Kazakhstan.

The list could go on and on. Trump trashed Japan for months, then spent nearly an entire weekend, replete with a Florida getaway and a surprise appearance at a wedding at Mar-a-Lago, joined at the hip with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. He repeatedly called into question the One China policy that underpins U.S. relations with the most populous country on Earth, then endorsed it on a phone call with Chinese leader Xi Jinping with no explanation. His defense secretary gave a warm and desperately needed embrace of a NATO alliance Trump recently called “obsolete,” before seeming to call into question the U.S. commitment to it if its members don’t start increasing their defense spending.

Did that amount to placing a condition on the previously iron-clad American commitment to collective self defense of alliance members? That would be a good question for the State Department. And there are many others.

But unfortunately the State Department, which for years has subjected its spokesperson to near-daily grillings that are far more policy-oriented than the White House equivalent, has not held an on-the-record briefing since January 19, the day before the inauguration. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has yet to take questions from the press, or even say anything substantive in public since his well-received remarks to the workforce on his first day in office. Tillerson, who many observers and Foggy Bottom employees hoped would help put the State Department back into the center of foreign policy discussions, has been undercut by reports that he and other senior officials were out of the loop for key decisions, like the botched Yemen raid and the badly bungled travel ban, and by his absence from Trump’s meetings with Netanyahu, Abe and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

[smjjames]

Oh yeah, btw, 10 of the people on the panel on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders quit a few days ago due to objections over Trump. Going to see if I can find an article. edit: Link and factual corrections http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/319907-10-resign-from-presidents-advisory-commission-on-asian-americans-and

I meant more like two planes accidentially colliding, something that would be considered a minor incident and a misunderstanding. The usual diplomatic channels that help manage that aren't manned, or aren't functioning well, to my understanding.
...
We just haven't had any major incidents happen yet, and it's inevitable for one to happen at some point. How many did Obama have? (rhetorical question)

Answering anyway. Obama had his first stand off with China in March of his first year. Bush faced exactly the scenario you mentioned above - two planes collided with 24 US airmen and their plane seized - in April 2001. That one took 11 days to negotiate their return.

The one with Bush is the one I was actually thinking of.

[Reelya]

So not only do we have a bad joke president, we're missing very important everythings because he can't be bothered to run things effectively?

Pretty much. Theres loads of positions that he hasn't even picked people for yet.

Perhaps this is his idea of downsizing the government. You just assume everyone is a time-wasting waste of space, then only appoint people to roles on a "as needed" basis. It's a very private industry way of thinking when you take over a business in a merger. Basically he's viewing this like a CEO would who just did a hostile takeover and now he's trying to "trim the fat" on the company he just got control of.

[redwallzyl]

So not only do we have a bad joke president, we're missing very important everythings because he can't be bothered to run things effectively?

Pretty much. Theres loads of positions that he hasn't even picked people for yet.

Perhaps this is his idea of downsizing the government. You just assume everyone is a time-wasting waste of space, then only appoint people to roles on a "as needed" basis. It's a very private industry way of thinking when you take over a business in a merger. Basically he's viewing this like a CEO would who just did a hostile takeover and now he's trying to "trim the fat" on the company he just got control of.

problem is the government works utterly differently then any company.

[Frumple]

Perhaps this is his idea of downsizing the government. You just assume everyone is a time-wasting waste of space, then only appoint people to roles on a "as needed" basis. It's a very private industry way of thinking when you take over a business in a merger. Basically he's viewing this like a CEO would who just did a hostile takeover and now he's trying to "trim the fat" on the company he just got control of.

... an incredibly incompetent one, maybe. It's pretty rare an incoming CEO will just mass trash the workforce, and rarer a company actually comes out better if they do. Turns out most people worth a paycheck realizes you actually need people that know what the hell's going on to keep everything from burning down. Trimming comes once you make sure everything's working correctly and you know who was doing what and why. _{Well, actually, you try to do that before you acquire a company like that, really, as much as possible, but whatever.}

Still, could be some of where the decision making's coming from, sure. No one that's paid attention has accused trump of being a good businessman.

problem is the government works utterly differently then any company.

Oh, no, no, not any company. Plenty of non-profits work in roughly the same manner, if several orders of magnitude smaller scale, and there's any number of commercial administration members that could make the transition without all that much trouble -- there's lots of business practices that are indeed pretty useful for government work, too. The actual problem is trump's shite at running a company.

E: Really, this is just me going, "Oh hell nah, don't go blaming this shit on business practices" again. The cluster going on here isn't because of business practice, heh. Not good ones, anyway. Not even many bad ones, tbh...

[smjjames]

It's more like 'Trump is running it the way he runs his business' than 'Trump is running it like a business'.

He's also never had to manage anything complex like say, the CEO of GM or Boeing does, which are the closest thing in complexity that companies get to a government. All those golf courses and hotels and such? While the workers may work for him, all he really owns is the real estate lease and title while the golf course or hotel manager is the de facto boss of that place, not Trump.

[Reelya]

From Trump's point of view he might actually believe that 80% of the government are time wasters who "make their own job" so to speak, and this mass-sacking is meant to prove that. Any externalities - i.e. harm to others caused by the collapse of services can be written off now as "fake news". it's basically not much different to corporate PR.

EDIT

And what's with all the Trump rallies? Another one in my news feed today? Trump basically sidesteps normal procedure for press conferences and diseminating the media message, and he also loves to hold cult-of-personality rallies. This is not normal. This amount of rallies is getting close to what a wannabe fascist dictator would hold to build up a core of zealots to overthrow normal society.

[smjjames]

He's doing more 'leaving the political appointee positions unfilled' than a mass sacking. Though he did ask the politically appointed ambassadors and DoS staff to leave on inauguration day, and he has sacked some DoS staff.

[Frumple]

From Trump's point of view he might actually believe that 80% of the government are time wasters who "make their own job" so to speak, and this mass-sacking is meant to prove that. Any externalities - i.e. harm to others caused by the collapse of services can be written off now as "fake news". it's basically not much different to corporate PR.

Eh... maybe, if more caricature than practice. Not much different in the sense of it takes a similar magnitude of screwup to be generating this kind of PR. Even with outward facing stuff, though, if the company's being ran worth a damn -- and not even much of a damn, mind you -- what you see is not what we're seeing, nor anything like it. Just... seriously, don't buy trump & co's bullshit about what's going on and what he's been doing having much at all to do with business. Really just kinda' dunnit. This ain't how you run a business, it's how you run one into the ground.

It's more like 'Trump is running it the way he runs his business' than 'Trump is running it like a business'.

That's about what I've been saying, yes :V

[smjjames]

And what's with all the Trump rallies? Another one in my news feed today? Trump basically sidesteps normal procedure for press conferences and diseminating the media message, and he also loves to hold cult-of-personality rallies. This is not normal. This amount of rallies is getting close to what a wannabe fascist dictator would hold to build up a core of zealots to overthrow normal society.

There's only been one in Florida today, and it's first since inauguration. As for your answer to 'all the Trump rallies', he's doing the perma campaign dialed up to 11, one guess to what he's campaigning for.

The perma campaign dialed up to 11 isn't normal either.

Could you link the 'another one in my news feed today'?

[Aklyon]

I'd say he's campaigning because he's better at that than actually dealing with being the president.

[Reelya]

http://www.news.com.au/world/president-trump-told-a-crowd-there-had-been-an-attack-on-sweden-actually-it-was-a-documentary/news-story/22c2657d96f0c1c778b24b8501a377a9

News from the rally now. Trump told the crowd there had just been a terror attack in Sweden. Unfortunately, that's correct - but it was just a TV show.

I'll bet if you try telling any Trumpeteers that it wasn't real, they'll now accuse you of living in a fake news bubble.

[smjjames]

Can't wait for when Trump actually goes to his first multinational meeting Pence and McCain went to the one that they just had in Munich. Oughta be !!!FUN!!!.

Also, for someone who bashes the media (including FOX!!) so much for fake news, he certainly seems controlled by it. Only a matter of time before he does something REALLY dumb

EDIT: Also, I'm half expecting him to blame the media for the first major crisis that has nothing to do with him, he's already blamed other stuff on the media. I could go further, but I REALLY don't want to taunt murphy.

[Starver]

(ex. That NASA scientist who was hounded from his position for wearing a risqué shirt his friend made for him to celebrate the success of the project his team had been working on for years.)

That ESA scientist who apologised for his (shop bought?) shirt but doesn't appear to have been actually hounded from anything?

Or are you mixing it up with the biochemist whose impromptu speech didn't get received as positively as he'd planned.

[misko27]

So not only do we have a bad joke president, we're missing very important everythings because he can't be bothered to run things effectively?

Pretty much. Theres loads of positions that he hasn't even picked people for yet.

And democrats are dragging the process out like a bad joke.

How many did Obama have? (rhetorical question)

Hmm. It's hard to count these sorts of things. Some of them never reach the public notice, others seem to be crises but are just overblown. Some things could have been crises under trump that would have been just another day for an Obama whitehouse. Not much has really happened in this administration, that much is for sure. When the shoe will drop, who knows.