• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

2017 Trump Presidency Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Russian Stooge Or Theater?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-23/ukraine-trump-administration-to-provide-lethal-weapons/9284122

A US decision to provide Ukraine with lethal weapons will fuel the conflict in the country's east, a senior Russian diplomat says.

Key points:

State Department says sending weapons is to "deter further aggression"
More than 10,000 people killed during conflict since 2014
US has already provided support equipment and training


US officials said on Friday that President Donald Trump's administration approved a plan to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine, including American-made Javelin anti-tank missiles.

Ukraine has long sought the weapons for its fight against Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine that has killed more than 10,000 people since April 2014.

The officials describing the plan were not authorised to discuss it publicly and demanded anonymity.

The State Department, responsible for overseeing foreign military sales, would not confirm that anti-tank missiles or other lethal weapons would be sent.

But in a statement, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said the US had decided to provide "enhanced defensive capabilities" to help Ukraine build its military long-term, defend its sovereignty and "deter further aggression".

"US assistance is entirely defensive in nature, and as we have always said, Ukraine is a sovereign country and has a right to defend itself," she said.
Previously, the US has provided Ukraine with support equipment and training, and has let private companies sell some small arms like rifles.

Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin told the state RIA Novostin news agency the US move "raises the danger of derailing the process of peaceful settlement in the Ukraine".

A 2015 peace deal brokered by France and Germany has helped reduce the scale of fighting in eastern Ukraine, but clashes have continued and the agreement's provisions for political settlement have stalled.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron issued a joint statement urging both sides of the conflict to live up to the ceasefire arrangement, known as the Minsk agreements.

"There is no alternative to an exclusively peaceful solution to the conflict," the statement read.
Click to expand...

What is he trying to prove? Meanwhile...

A Marine Corps commandant on Thursday warned U.S. troops stationed in Norway to be prepared for a coming war.

“I hope I’m wrong, but there’s a war coming,” Gen. Robert Neller told them. “You’re in a fight here, an informational fight, a political fight, by your presence.”


Neller pointed to the near future possibility of Russia and the Pacific theater being the next major areas of conflict.

Sgt. Maj. Ronald Green sounded a similar tone.

"Just remember why you're here," Green said. "They're watching. Just like you watch them, they watch you. We've got 300 Marines up here; we could go from 300 to 3,000 overnight. We could raise the bar."

The warnings came a day before Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told troops at Fort Bragg, N.C., that "storm clouds are gathering" over the Korean Peninsula.
Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/12/23/theres-war-coming-marine-corps-general-warns-us-troops.html

I don't see why we have to compete with China and Russia to rule the world. It is better to liberate North Korea together than fight over Islands and Estonia.
 
Captain.Heroin said:
Agreed. It reeks of eugenics as well.

When will open borders happen?

P.S. Trump said Haitian immigrants all have AIDS?! link



That's extremely racist, like, bizarrely racist. I know he doesn't need the African American vote to get re-elected, but how can the Republicans keep claiming they're not racist if they vote for him in 2020 after saying these things? :? This is a step above and beyond merely saying things like "bad hombres".
Click to expand...

Exactly!
 
Morninggloryseed said:
I am going to enjoy the extra money I have every two weeks. I am going to save it for the long run.
Click to expand...

Ditto. I'll probably adjust my automated banking so that I never see the money and instead it goes straight to some saving instrument.

Which probably means we aren't effective targets for tax cuts if the goal is to stimulate the economy. :)
 
Judge Sides With ACLU, Ruling American Detainee In Iraq Has Right To Lawyer
"Somewhere in Iraq, a United States citizen has been in the custody of the U.S. armed forces for over three months."

That is how a federal Judge on Saturday begins her ruling, describing the situation of a never-charged American classified as an enemy combatant, as she ordered the Pentagon provide the prisoner with "immediate" access to a lawyer.

The still-unnamed man was captured by the Syrian militia in mid-September and handed over to the U.S. military as a suspected member of the Islamic State.

A couple weeks later, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a habeas corpus petition and seeking to represent the man, who, by the government's own account, requested an attorney after being read his Miranda rights.

The Defense Department argued that the circumstances did not warrant the ACLU's having immediate access to the detainee.

But in a case shrouded in secrecy, what exactly those circumstances are remains unclear. And the case is reviving thorny issues around the government's wartime powers weighed against individuals' civil liberties.

In her at-times-blistering ruling, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia denied the Pentagon's motion to dismiss the ACLU's petition and ordered that it give the group "immediate and unmonitored access to the detainee."

Read the ruling below.

Chutkan described the Defense Department's position in denying the ACLU access to the detainee "to be disingenuous at best."

She went on, "the Department's position that his request should simply be ignored until it decides what to do with the detainee and when to allow him access to counsel is both remarkable and troubling."

It remains unclear how long the military plans to hold the detainee. It is also unclear whether the government will comply with the ruling.

Justice Department Spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle told The New York Times, "We're reviewing the ruling and will decline to comment."

The ACLU welcomed the decision.

"This is a landmark ruling that rejects the Trump administration's unprecedented attempt to block an American citizen from challenging his executive imprisonment," ACLU Senior Staff Attorney Jonathan Hafetz told NPR's Ryan Lucas in a statement. "Ensuring citizens detained by the government have access to a lawyer and a court is essential to preserving the Constitution and the rule of law in America."

The detainee was captured Sept. 12 and by the end of the month the ACLU had sent a letter to Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, expressing concern about the case and reminding them of the detainee's constitutional right to counsel.

The Times reports, "officials familiar with the matter have said he is a dual citizen of the United States and Saudi Arabia who was born on American soil to visiting Saudi parents and raised in Saudi Arabia."

The Times has reported that national security officials in the Trump administration were considering transferring the detainee to Saudi Arabia in a move that could potentially involve the man renouncing his American citizenship.

In her ruling, Chutkan ordered that the Defense Department not transfer the detainee to another country until the ACLU learns about and informs the court of his own wishes.
Click to expand...

an important ruling supporting 6th amendment rights and against this administration's attempts to curtail civil liberties.
 
Escher's Waterfall said:
Ditto. I'll probably adjust my automated banking so that I never see the money and instead it goes straight to some saving instrument.

Which probably means we aren't effective targets for tax cuts if the goal is to stimulate the economy. :)
Click to expand...

Mines going to my drug dealer!
 
tathra said:
the constitution applies to everyone on US soil, citizen or not, even extra-terratorial places like guantanamo; basically everywhere the US flag flies, the constitution applies. this unnamed guy, however, is an american citizen, and they still tried to deny him right to counsel. fucked up beyond belief.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Far too few people realize this. You're completely correct, there is nothing that says the bill or rights or the rest of the constitution only protects citizens. It constrains the government, which means it constrains them for everyone.

If you live under American government you have legal rights.

They can't be inherent inalienable rights unless they apply to everyone.
 
Of course. That’s the idea. Other countries do the same, although some people believe that not knowing your rights and obligations exempt them from responsibility.
 
The Times said its report was the product of more than three dozen interviews. The explosive and disparaging remarks about immigrants attributed to the president were sourced to a pair of unnamed officials, one who the Times said was present in the meeting, and another who was briefed about the comments by a second attendee. But the Times says several other participants told them they "did not recall" the President using those words.
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/23/politics/donald-trump-oval-office-immigration/index.html
 
JessFR said:
Thank you. Far too few people realize this. You're completely correct, there is nothing that says the bill or rights or the rest of the constitution only protects citizens. It constrains the government, which means it constrains them for everyone.

If you live under American government you have legal rights.

They can't be inherent inalienable rights unless they apply to everyone.
Click to expand...

Both your's and Tathras p p posts were most informative. Thank you.
 
Well the 6th amendment applies to criminal proceedings. It's my understanding that these are civil issues.
 
Im probably going to sound like an asshole but borders are there for a reason. Any country has every right to know who crosses their borders, why they are there and how long they are there for. If a tourist visa holder overstays and works then that costs a citizen a job and doesnt guarantee that illegal worker the wage and conditions expected of someone with a tax file number.

Open borders are not a good option as whats the point in having a recognised country in the first place? Why bother paying tax and obeying laws related to your area when people can come and live there willy nilly? Borders are there for a lot of reasons. People get kicked out of every other country for being illegally there so who cares?


Id say to USA stop fucking around, strengthen your borders, build a wall or whatever on your own coin and deport ppl that are illegal.

Get your economy going. Focus on domestic shit. Figure out how to negotiate and get along with other countries for shit you need from other countries.
 
Last edited:
zephyr said:
Im probably going to sound like an asshole but botders are there for a reason. Any country has every right to know who crosses their borders, why they are there and how long they are there for. If a tourist visa holder overstays and works then that costs a citizen a job and doesnt guarantee that illegal worker the wage and conditions expected of someone with a tax file number.

Open borders are not a good option as whats the point in having a recognised country in the first place? Why bother paying tax and obeying laws related to your area when people can come and live there willy nilly? Borders are there for a lot of reasons. Peoplw get kicked out of every other country for being illegally there so who cares?


Id say to USA stop fucking around, strengthen your borders, build a wall or whatever on your own coin and deport ppl that are illegal.

Get your economy going. Focus on domestic shit. Figure out how to negotiate and get along with other countries for shit you need from other countries.
Click to expand...
We have communist lobbies here like the open society foundation that pay a lot of money to alter public perception to make it seem like our constitution calls for open borders and that open borders is a net positive for the country. Because a mass influx of unskilled labor willing to take slave wages is a net positive for any economy! S/
I know Nancy pelosi and other Uber rich people that own large agricultural corporations love their wage slaves!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
zephyr said:
Im probably going to sound like an asshole but borders are there for a reason. Any country has every right to know who crosses their borders, why they are there and how long they are there for. If a tourist visa holder overstays and works then that costs a citizen a job and doesnt guarantee that illegal worker the wage and conditions expected of someone with a tax file number.

Open borders are not a good option as whats the point in having a recognised country in the first place? Why bother paying tax and obeying laws related to your area when people can come and live there willy nilly? Borders are there for a lot of reasons. People get kicked out of every other country for being illegally there so who cares?


Id say to USA stop fucking around, strengthen your borders, build a wall or whatever on your own coin and deport ppl that are illegal.

Get your economy going. Focus on domestic shit. Figure out how to negotiate and get along with other countries for shit you need from other countries.
Click to expand...

Sounds both logical and reasonable.

We need to end chain migration and lottery visas, and secure the border (please god send some predator drones) then we can pass a form of daca that makes sense, like ensuring that were a minor child upon verifiable entry with no criminal history.
 
Last edited:
zephyr said:
Im probably going to sound like an asshole but borders are there for a reason. Any country has every right to know who crosses their borders, why they are there and how long they are there for. If a tourist visa holder overstays and works then that costs a citizen a job and doesnt guarantee that illegal worker the wage and conditions expected of someone with a tax file number.

Open borders are not a good option as whats the point in having a recognised country in the first place? Why bother paying tax and obeying laws related to your area when people can come and live there willy nilly? Borders are there for a lot of reasons. People get kicked out of every other country for being illegally there so who cares?


Id say to USA stop fucking around, strengthen your borders, build a wall or whatever on your own coin and deport ppl that are illegal.

Get your economy going. Focus on domestic shit. Figure out how to negotiate and get along with other countries for shit you need from other countries.
Click to expand...

We deport a phenomenally large number of people each year.

I'll politely disagree with your view on having a border wall. It would cost an insane amount of money and be highly inefficient.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top