USA Izbori

[iDemo]

Ne bi bio drzavni udar ali bi do njega doslo

 

Inviato dal mio Redmi 4 utilizzando Tapatalk

+11

[iDemo]

ok, idemo dalje... koliko nedelja predviđate da će proći dok neki plaćenik fabrike oružja ne zatraži impičment od trampa? predviđam mu najduže dve nedelje od inauguracije... možda i pre toga? pronaći će nekoga ko neverovatno liči na trampa i fotografisaće ga kako sere u nekom parku, ili nešto slično.

Jedina (bitna) razlika izmedju Trampa i Baglame ce biti sto Tramp (jos) nije dobio Nobela... I sto nije polubeo k'o Baglama - al' to vec nije bitno za ovu pricu. 

[Eraserhead]

Obama izgleda blokira naftne busotine na Arktiku pre dolaska Trampa ne bi li mu bar malo zakomplikovao situaciju. Mada slaba vajda. Stize naftna renesansa.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/11/18/barack-obama-arctic-drilling/%3Fsource%3Ddam

 

Meni je samo smesno da neko veruje da je Tramp antisistemski kandidat.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Eraserhead

[dragance]

Upravo potrvdjen Trump.

 

Edit: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/19/electoral-college-meets-to-formally-elect-trump-amid-protests.html

Edited December 19, 2016 by dragance

[MNE]

Obama izgleda blokira naftne busotine na Arktiku pre dolaska Trampa ne bi li mu bar malo zakomplikovao situaciju. Mada slaba vajda. Stize naftna renesansa.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/11/18/barack-obama-arctic-drilling/%3Fsource%3Ddam

 

Meni je samo smesno da neko veruje da je Tramp antisistemski kandidat.

protiv obaminog sistema očigledno jeste, neki drugi sistem će morati da bude uspostavljen

[ObiW]

Jos malo dobrih vesti. The cabinet from central casting:
 

What is Trump doing? The best explanation is that he’s evaluating people based less on their actual policy background or knowledge than on whether they look like the kinds of people who would have the relevant background or knowledge.

 

 

 

First, Trump himself lacks the policy knowledge to appreciate the difference between someone like Friedman and someone with a deep background on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. During the campaign, after all, he couldn't name the leaders of ISIS, Al Qaeda, or Hezbollah; didn't know what the nuclear triad was; and seemed unfamiliar with the term “Brexit” just weeks before Britons went to the polls.

 

 

 

Second, Trump’s thinking is often shaped by stereotypes. In a speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition last December, he told the crowd   that, “I’m a negotiator, like you folks” and repeatedly declared that he wouldn’t win the RJC’s support because “I don’t want your money.” In 1991, he allegedly said  that, “The only guys I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes all day.”   :0.6:

 

 

 

If Jews know about money and negotiation, they presumably also know about Israel. As Business Insider  noted in October, Trump frequently refers to groups as collectives: “The blacks,” “the Hispanics,” “the Muslims, “the gays.” So if the Jews care about Israel, choose a Jew as ambassador. Problem solved.

 

 

 

Finally, Trump cares a lot about appearances. According to The New York Times, he said Mike Pence looked like a vice president out of “central casting.” When a crowd urged him to consider former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown for the job, Trump made the same comment about him. He reportedly used the same phrase to describe Mitt Romney as secretary of state. Earlier this month, Trump told a rally that his nominee for secretary of defense, James Mattis, is “the closest thing to General George Patton that we have.” Given that Trump, by his own admission, rarely reads books, he likely formed his image of Patton by watching the 1970 movie starring George C. Scott. (It’s among his favorite films.) What Trump was really telling the crowd, in other words, is that a guy with the nickname “Mad Dog” (Trump invokes Mattis’s nickname frequently) looks the part of a tough-guy general, just as David Friedman looks the part of an ambassador to Israel. 

 

I na kraju:

 

 

 

Republicans have long prided themselves on seeing people as individuals rather than members of ethnic, racial, or gender groups. But because Donald Trump doesn’t know or care what his appointees don’t know, because he trades in stereotypes, and because he’s highly attuned to the way people look, he appears to be practicing the most blatant tokenism of any president in my lifetime. And few Republicans seem bothered at all.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/the-cabinet-from-central-casting/511022/

[Lord Protector]

First, Trump himself lacks the policy knowledge to appreciate the difference between someone like Friedman and someone with a deep background on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. During the campaign, after all, he couldn't name the leaders of ISIS, Al Qaeda, or Hezbollah; didn't know what the nuclear triad was; and seemed unfamiliar with the term “Brexit” just weeks before Britons went to the polls.

 

 

If Jews know about money and negotiation, they presumably also know about Israel. As Business Insider noted in October, Trump frequently refers to groups as collectives: “The blacks,” “the Hispanics,” “the Muslims, “the gays.” So if the Jews care about Israel, choose a Jew as ambassador. Problem solved.

 

 

To je simplifikacija. Fridman je izabran za ambasadora da bi se umirili glasovi koji su bili javno zabrinuti za bezbednost Izraela. Drugo, Trampa je počeo da kritikuje dobar deo levog spektra sa optužbom da se okružio rasistima i alt-right antisemitima (Benon posebno) tako da je ovo imenovanje taktički manevar u umirivanju AIPAC-a i lobista. I uspeli su u tome, Deršovic je otvoreno stao u zaštitu Trampa, i ne samo on.

Edited December 20, 2016 by slow

[ObiW]

To je simplifikacija. Fridman je izabran za ambasadora da bi se umirili glasovi koji su bili javno zabrinuti za bezbednost Izraela.

 

u, da, bas im je bezbednost otisla u picku materinu za vreme Obame.  

[Eraserhead]

u, da, bas im je bezbednost otisla u picku materinu za vreme Obame.

Samo totalni ekstremisti mogu obezbediti bezbednost.

[Weenie Pooh]

Jel' vreme da se polako zatvara topić, ili se čeka inauguracija?

 

[hazard]

To je simplifikacija. Fridman je izabran za ambasadora da bi se umirili glasovi koji su bili javno zabrinuti za bezbednost Izraela. Drugo, Trampa je počeo da kritikuje dobar deo levog spektra sa optužbom da se okružio rasistima i alt-right antisemitima (Benon posebno) tako da je ovo imenovanje taktički manevar u umirivanju AIPAC-a i lobista. I uspeli su u tome, Deršovic je otvoreno stao u zaštitu Trampa, i ne samo on.

 

Desnicarski jevrejski komentatori (npr. "Spengler") od pocetka pricaju kako je Tramp super za Izrael.

 

Ivanka je presla na judaizam da bi se udala za Kusnera, sa te strane familije dolazi politika prema Izraelu i Jevrejima, ne iz Trampove glave i njegovih stereotipa.

[ObiW]

 

 

Ivanka je presla na judaizam da bi se udala za Kusnera, sa te strane familije dolazi politika prema Izraelu i Jevrejima, ne iz Trampove glave i njegovih stereotipa.

Stereotipi su postojali mnogo pre nego sto je Ivanka upoznala muza. To i pise na samom pocetku teksta, prvi paragraf, koji nisam citirao.

[Prospero]

putin's puppet!
 
 

Russia Missing from Trump’s Top Defense Priorities, According to DoD Memo
Meanwhile, Pentagon brass say Moscow is the No. 1 threat to the United States.

• By John Hudson, Paul McLeary, Dan De Luce
• 
  
  December 20, 2016

A Pentagon memo outlining the incoming Trump administration’s top “defense priorities” identifies defeating the Islamic State, eliminating budget caps, developing a new cyber strategy, and finding greater efficiencies as the president-elect’s primary concerns. But the memo, obtained by Foreign Policy, does not include any mention of Russia, which has been identified by senior military officials as the No. 1 threat to the United States.
 
“People there now would be pretty concerned to see Russia not on the list,” said Evelyn Farkas, a former senior Pentagon official who worked on Russia policy before leaving in 2015.
 
For years, top cabinet officials at the Defense Department and the intelligence community cited Russia as the foremost threat because of its vast nuclear arsenal, sophisticated cyber capabilities, recently modernized military, and willingness to challenge the United States and its allies in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and other regions.
 
Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who will remain in that role after Trump takes office Jan. 20, told Congress last year that no other threat is more serious.
 
“If you want to talk about a nation that could pose an existential threat to the United States, I’d have to point to Russia,” Dunford told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “If you look at their behavior, it’s nothing short of alarming.” He listed China, North Korea, and the Islamic State as the next biggest threats, in that order.
 
The memo, dated Dec. 1, was written by acting Undersecretary of Defense for policy Brian McKeon to employees in his office. In it, McKeon said the four-point list of priorities was conveyed to him by Mira Ricardel, a former Bush administration official and co-leader of Trump’s Pentagon transition team.
 

The full memo is here.
 
Besides placing an emphasis on budgetary issues, “force strength,” and counterterrorism in Iraq and Syria, the memo noted other briefings between the Defense Department and the Trump transition team on China and North Korea. But Russia was not mentioned.
 
A Trump transition official declined to say where Russia fits into the president-elect’s defense priorities, but said the memo is “not comprehensive.”
 
“For the media to speculate that this list of issues represents all of the president-elect’s priorities is completely erroneous and misleading,” said the Trump official, who insisted on anonymity.
 
A Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on the incoming Trump administration’s priorities, but said the transition team had been briefed on issues related to Russia.
“We would leave it up to them to describe their priorities,” Gordon Trowbridge, the deputy Pentagon press secretary told FP. “We have provided them with multiple briefings that touched on Russia policy. That’s the extent of our knowledge on their priorities.”
 
Since the beginning of his campaign, Trump has openly argued that an improved relationship with Russia is in the interest of the United States, especially relating to counterterrorism efforts in Iraq and Syria.
 
“Wouldn’t it be nice if we got together with Russia and knocked the hell out of ISIS?” Trump said in July, a line he frequently reiterated on the campaign trail.
Last week, he nominated ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson as secretary of state, arguing that the oilman’s extensive business dealings in Russia would be a major asset in international negotiations. Under Tillerson’s leadership, Exxon has lobbied against U.S. sanctions imposed on Moscow over its armed incursion into Ukraine and seizing of Crimea in 2014. The oil giant stands to profit from deals in Russia worth billions of dollars if the sanctions are lifted.
 
Trump’s messaging throughout the campaign markedly improved GOP attitudes on Russia, according to recent polling. But the U.S. foreign policy establishment — including large swaths of employees at the Pentagon, State Department and CIA — remains deeply skeptical of Moscow.
 
Steven Pifer, a scholar at the Brookings Institution who spent 25 years as a State Department diplomat, said the memo was “both surprising and concerning … given what the Russians are doing against Ukraine, their military modernization effort, the bellicose tone we’ve heard from Moscow the past three years, and NATO’s effort to bolster conventional deterrence and defense capabilities in the Baltic region.”
 
Last February, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper emphasized that the Islamic State terrorist group isn’t nearly as threatening to U.S. interests as Moscow. The Islamic State “can’t inflict mortal damage to the United States,” he said. “Russia can.”
 
That outlook is reflected in how the federal government has directed billions of dollars of defense spending. The Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer earlier this month said that U.S. defense budgets are now focused primarily on countering Moscow.
 
The White House earmarked an extra $3.4 billion in the 2014 defense spending bill to deploy two more U.S. Army brigades to eastern Europe — along with hundreds of tanks and heavily armored vehicles pre-positioned for use in case of war with Russia.
 
The Pentagon and its NATO allies have revamped some training exercises specifically to replicate fighting  Russian armed forces, head of the U.S. Army in Europe, Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, told FP. Hundreds of American, British, and Canadian troops are deployed to western Ukraine, where they’re training Ukrainian forces who are seeing daily combat with Russian-trained and equipped separatists in the country’s east. Many of those separatist units are led by Russian officers, Hodges said.
 
Under a Trump administration, those initiatives could be scaled back, but not without a fight. Republican hawks in Congress, including Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and John McCain of Arizona, have pledged to oppose a softer line on Russia. Last week, Rubio openly cast doubt on his support for Tillerson in what will likely be a testy confirmation battle.
 
Others said it was too soon to judge the posture that Trump’s Pentagon would take toward Russia as Gen. James Mattis, his pick for defense secretary, hasn’t been confirmed yet.
 
“I would give this a little bit more time to be fleshed out and to hear more directly from Gen. Mattis about what his priorities will be,” said Heather Conley, a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
 
A defense official with knowledge of the transition process confirmed that the Trump transition team has met with relevant officials tasked with Russia policy at the Pentagon, but said: “There’s not a lot of back and forth, it’s been mostly ‘how are you set up.’”
 
A second Pentagon official called the meetings professional, but said it is hard to discern the shape of the next administration’s policies before a defense secretary is in place.
 
Farkas, after reviewing the memo, said she would expect significant resistance from Pentagon officials if the next president tries to pursue its policy priorities as outlined. “They will find ways to drag their heels,” she said. “Clearly, the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs still has six months to go, and he also agrees that Russia is the No. 1 threat.”

 

[hazard]

stari beltway glodari jedva su docekali novi hladni rat sa Rusijom (bilo je toliko ocigledno) - poznat protivnik, stara prica, odlican izgovor da se trosi na raznorazne megalomanske projekte - i sad su u strahu da ne izgube tu novu igracku

[Eraserhead]

Koliko smara ta kuknjava o ruskoj umesanosti. Posebno sto kada se sagledaju racionalno argumenti Putinu Tramp manje ide na ruku iz vise razloga:

 

1. Nema vise dezurnog krivca za sve od kasnjenja penzija medjunarodne ugrozenosti koja zahteva da se svi ujedinimo pod vodjom

 

2. Tramp donosi energetsku revoluciju u kojoj nije vise nikoga briga za klimatske promene i obnovljive izvore energije vec je vazno da teku reke nafte... i novca. To dugorocno garantuje da cena nafte ostaje niska. Problem za zemlje koje su sustinski benzinska pumpa poput Rusije, KSA, Venecuele...

 

3. Nema vise Obame koji se bavi tamo nekim ljudskim pravima koja Putina ni malo ne interesuju i tako potpuno promasio temu.

 

4. Sve ove belosvetske bitange koje su uzora nasle u Putinu od raznih autoritaraca poput Sisija preko ubica poput Duertea pa do fasista iz FPOa ili NF imaju novog potencijalnog idola ili bar zastitnika.

 

5. Tramp je fokusiran na Kinu a Rusija mu tu dodje kao mladji brat na ciju podrsku racuna.

 

Pa nije Tramp postao najmocniji covek na svetu da bi bilo koga slusao.