Off Topic Trump supporters breaching Capitol Hill in Washington DC

I'm sure its the same kind of tax investigation that's currently looking into a lot of people.

Not really sure what you're arguing here.

I don't think Biden was a good candidate. I doubt he will make a good president. I'm not some warrior for doddery old Joe.

But I thought we were talking about Trump...

 

Boom boom bang bang
7000 jobs plus 40000 in supply chain guaranted work

 

Those figures aren’t even close.

 

In that case, he will be in the same position as Bidens family...

Being looked into by tax authorities.

 

We are talking about trump.

My point is, people who despise trump like yourself, often completely overlook worse actions by other presidents and their administrations.

Because your agenda only suits one purpose.

 

You're wrong, just above I've called Barack Obama ineffective and Biden a poor candidate.

I think Bush was a likeable dullard puppet and Clinton was a lying chauvinist pig.

I'm overlooking nothing at all and I don't have an agenda. You're making that up.

I don't like them or their legacy. I'm well within my rights to dislike Trump.

You're well off.

 

that’s fair enough.

 

If Biden's son has actually done wrong then I hope he faces justice. I think we all know that Trump himself has committed scores of crimes, and it is just a matter of wait and see if he has to face justice for these crimes.

 

And the difference is Biden's SON is not the president.

 

Bash away there, wouldn't expect anything less. What I would expect is for folk to stick to what is factually accurate though as it does no favours when you make claims that are easily refuted after a quick google search. I would have thought those with a strong sense of moral correctness would refrain from stooping as low as that and wouldn't need to make incorrect claims to back up their position.

 

America were one of the only countries paying what they should do into NATO though and Trump quite reasonably asked why should America foot the bill when other countries weren't. I guess the Germans would rather pay into Nord Stream 2 which would be good for Merkel as it provides a load of jobs in her home state and would be great for the Russian economy rather than paying agreed amounts into the runnng of NATO. "Germany is reportedly hitting 1.57% – an increase on 2019 but still below the NATO guideline."

https://www.forces.net/news/world/nato-which-countries-pay-their-share-defence

Germans should get their house in order over this, always the chance Russia would feel emboldened when it sees the dominant country of Europe shirking it's responsibilities to it's NATO partners.

 

"U.S. military forces have been at war for all eight years of Obama’s tenure, the first two-term president with that distinction. He launched airstrikes or military raids in at least seven countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.

Obama slashed the number of U.S. troops in war zones from 150,000 to 14,000, and stopped the flow of American soldiers coming home in body bags...but he vastly expanded the role of elite commando units and the use of new technology, including armed drones and cyber weapons.

He kept U.S. ground forces out of Syria’s bloody civil war but could not stop a conflict now in its sixth tragic year — and saw America’s influence weaken as Russia and Iran filled the gap.

In a speech on Dec. 6 at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, Obama all but conceded that he was unable to get America out of the foreign wars, large and small, that grew out of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“We know that in some form this violent extremism will be with us for years to come,” Obama said. “In too many parts of the world, especially in the Middle East, there has been a breakdown of order that's been building for decades, and it’s unleashed forces that are going to take a generation to resolve.”

https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-obama-at-war/

Obama had his moments, some good some bad, but if he hadn't have decided to scale back US involvement in the middle east Iran, Russia and Turkey for that matter wouldn't have managed to gain the influential foothold they currently have. You could pin the blame for that on Obama but the problem with taking that option is it's too simplistic an analysis and he can't be held responsible for all the issues in the middle east. I think it's similar with Trump, far too simplistic to blame him for everything as that just isn't true.

 

A question... is the world better or worse, for Obama being President... the same question for Trump?

 

Not sure. I could say Obama made the world a more dangerous place by pulling troops out of the middle east and allowing a power vacuum to be filled by Russia, Iran and Turkey and I could say he made it safer by ordering the assasination of Bin Laden. I could also say Trump made the world a more dangerous place by pulling troops out of the middle east and helping to cement Russian, Iranian and Tukish influence but made it safer by ordering the assasination of Qasem Soleimani.

What do you think, did one of them make it safer and the other more dangerous?

 

Interesting read that Sandy, thanks for posting

 

By and large politicians of any hue very rarely make things better. However for what it is worth Trump for the likes of most Western Democratic countries has been the worst ever.

As this is a football forum, Sunderland have had mostly poor managers, think of the worst, we have had a few... and that is Trump.

 

Not sure Trump ****ed things up in the middle east as much as Obama did. In fact, I'd say Obama ****ed things up good and proper over his red line cowardice.

"The war in Syria proved the greatest challenge for Obama, and much of his legacy may well depend on how history views his response. In August 2012, Obama publicly warned that President Bashar Assad would cross a “red line” if his forces used chemical weapons against rebels seeking his ouster.
A year later, when poison gas attacks killed hundreds in rebel-held areas of Damascus, Obama faced a decision: Make good on his implied threat and launch cruise missiles and bombers against Syria’s government and military? Or back down to keep America out of a civil war? Obama initially appeared on the verge of ordering a massive attack. The Pentagon moved warships into place, readied missiles and bombers, dusted off targeting plans and waited for the go signal.

Then he hit the brakes.

Secretary of State John F. Kerry had been so confident Obama was about to launch the missiles that he’d given a speech that day at the State Department, implying an attack on Assad was on the way. James Stavridis, a retired U.S. Navy admiral who served as NATO supreme commander until 2013 and is now dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, said Obama’s lack of action in Syria would not be forgotten. He “will be judged harshly for … failing to enforce the so-called red line in Syria against Assad's use of chemical weapons,” he said. “And for not taking out Assad's air force before the Russian involvement, which made it vastly more difficult to do.”

https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-obama-at-war/

A question...how has Trump been worse than Obama over the middle east?

 

Now why do you think Obama sanctioned those things? Do you think he done it for a laugh or do you think he was fighting against Islamic extremism?

 

I'm sure I'm about to commit a culture error.

I'm a righty. I believe in the smallest possible central government; individual freedom and responsibility; and a STRONG national defence.

I was shocked that Trump emerged as the leading GOP candidate from the primaries. He was my last choice.

What he did correctly and differently is he kept his campaign promises and he put America first. The steel tarrif revitalized manufacturing.

What he did wrong and differently is he embarrased the Office of the President of the United States of America and severely wounded the GOP.

 

I'd guess he did it for the same reasons Trump sanctioned activities in the middle east; they both thought it was the best option. History has shown that Obama's failure to stick to his red line warning over Syria was wrong though as that allowed Russia to feel emboldened enough to put troops in and supply missle defence systems to al-Assad. I'd also say that Trump made a mistake when he announced troop withdrawals as that helped to cement the emboldening of Russia in that area. Both inherited the situation and both made the decisions they thought were for the best. Would you disagree with any of this?