World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[marurun]

As a Political Thread everyone has their opinions;

And when your beliefs are founded on bad information, it means your beliefs are wrong.

I feel the same way, the 90 day ban to get the vetting figured out. The rollout screwed up since some were already cleared before the shutdown.

Gee, Obama and previous presidents didn't need a ban to get the details sorted out. Why does Trump? Probably has something to do with how little he understands about the responsibilities of being president (which he seems to be mistaking for being dictator).

[Sarge]

Sure, it makes it better, because green card holders are subject to more thorough vetting... when the government doesn't mess up.

http://www.usnews.com/news/national-new ... n-platform

[marurun]

Hah! Trump's administration is failing to follow an executive order (11030, in effect since 1962) requiring all subsequent executive orders be routed through the Office of Management and Budget and then the Attorney General for review and approval. This process is non-optional unless explicitly altered or struck by another EO. There's no real punishment or anything for this, but it just goes to show how completely incapable this administration is for following proper process.

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/03/tru ... ve-orders/

[emwearz]

What is your take and the general concensus from down under?

Do Australians feel compelled to keep the refugee/immigrants or should all the people be relocated to the U.S.?

Ignoring that phone call, how do Australians feel about the U.S. military and scientists station in Australia? Not trying to corner you; just curious straight from Australia on these issues.

What is your take and the general concensus from down under?
Pretty much every media outlet and anyone I have spoken to is outraged by the lack of respect shown towards Australia, and just how unprofessional Trump is when talking to foreign leaders. and tweeting about deals and what not, kind of a joke. However I don't think many people think anything along the lines of The US did this or that. it is all about Trump. The almost 70 year alliance between Australia and The US is bigger than either of its leaders. Trump's attitude just seemed to scream of how much Australia needed The US, our trade is primarily with China, last I saw our trade with the US only equals about 30% of our trade with the States.

Some news outlets had an angle that were pissed off that Turnbull did not tell Trump to fuck off pretty much.

Do Australians feel compelled to keep the refugee/immigrants or should all the people be relocated to the U.S.?
Australia has a highly debated blanket rule to not accept asylum seekers / anyone, who arrives by boat. It has been a hot topic for the past few leaders, but with Turnbull being the leader of a right wing party, it won't be changing anytime soon.

Ignoring that phone call, how do Australians feel about the U.S. military and scientists station in Australia? Not trying to corner you; just curious straight from Australia on these issues.

Again, I can't talk for Australians, but the general view is that we have a treaty, ANZUS, with the US and as a smaller country that generally has our code of ethics align with that of the US some hard left people think our defense force should not be involved in wars that "have nothing to do with us" and that having a US militarily presence invites their enemies to mark Australia, however most people, myself included, understand it is:

a) part of being the "smaller" party in the treaty, our location on the world map is our greatest defense and also our greatest asset to a country like the US.

b) it all but assures our security, with the US Navy constantly being docked in Australia, our borders have another layer of security that we could never provide for ourselves.

However I think this quote from The Guardian sums up how many Australians feel about the military relationship with the US-Australia alliance pretty well.

The relationship is of course bound by more than economics. Since WWII, as is often noted, we have fought alongside the US in every major war – Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, Afghanistan, Iraq and now against Islamic State.

But it is a relationship where Australia often gets ignored or forgotten.

You don’t need to be prime ministers Trunbull, or John Hunt to know that Americans can often be less knowledgeable of us than we are of them.

Similarly, despite that willingness to be side by side in battle, our sacrifice is not always appreciated in a fitting manner.

Robert MacNamara, the secretary of defence from 1961 to 1968, for example, remarked in the documentary The Fog of War that the US should have realised its cause in Vietnam was wrong because “none of our allies supported us; not Japan, not Germany, not Britain or France”.

None?

That’s a pretty sharp slap to the face of the nearly 60,000 Australian men and women who served in the Vietnam War, let alone the 521 who died.

Also think when it is paired with the fact Australians will soon have to go to a US embassy and have a one on one meeting to get a visitors Visa to visit the States can only make Australians feel below the current "Trump's America".

[CRTGAMER]

What is your take and the general consensus from down under?
Pretty much every media outlet and anyone I have spoken to is outraged by the lack of respect shown towards Australia, and just how unprofessional Trump is when talking to foreign leaders. and tweeting about deals and what not, kind of a joke. However I don't think many people think anything along the lines of The US did this or that. it is all about Trump. The almost 70 year alliance between Australia and The US is bigger than either of its leaders. Trump's attitude just seemed to scream of how much Australia needed The US, our trade is primarily with China, last I saw our trade with the US only equals about 30% of our trade with the States.

Some news outlets had an angle that were pissed off that Turnbull did not tell Trump to fuck off pretty much.

Agree, Prime Minister Turnbull should stand his ground for all of Australia. This is the way I feel about President Trump as well in backing America. However, as you mentioned the alliance is the important issue, not the outbursts of the temporary leaders. Hopefully the situation between our countries get resolved, we have a long history as great allies.

From what you describe it appears many down under think the tweets are childish and not good diplomacy. I cannot speak for all in my country, but the tweets here have worked on various issues. The world reads the tweets which puts the president and anyone involved on notice. A couple of one liners in a tweet is no way to run a country, but then just a few words having so much impact getting immediate action maybe a good thing?

Do Australians feel compelled to keep the refugee/immigrants or should all the people be relocated to the U.S.?
Australia has a highly debated blanket rule to not accept asylum seekers / anyone, who arrives by boat. It has been a hot topic for the past few leaders, but with Turnbull being the leader of a right wing party, it won't be changing anytime soon.

This is what I have read, thank you for the first hand report in that. It is curious how President Obama has promised to take on the asylum seekers, or was that the arrangement before they left their country of origin? A bad situation that conflicts with the immigration 90 day hold ban which currently is being battled out by judges over here.

Ignoring that phone call, how do Australians feel about the U.S. military and scientists station in Australia? Not trying to corner you; just curious straight from Australia on these issues.
Again, I can't talk for Australians, but the general view is that we have a treaty, ANZUS, with the US and as a smaller country that generally has our code of ethics align with that of the US some hard left people think our defense force should not be involved in wars that "have nothing to do with us" and that having a US militarily presence invites their enemies to mark Australia, however most people, myself included, understand it is:

a) part of being the "smaller" party in the treaty, our location on the world map is our greatest defense and also our greatest asset to a country like the US.

b) it all but assures our security, with the US Navy constantly being docked in Australia, our borders have another layer of security that we could never provide for ourselves.

However I think this quote from The Guardian sums up how many Australians feel about the military relationship with the US-Australia alliance pretty well.

The relationship is of course bound by more than economics. Since WWII, as is often noted, we have fought alongside the US in every major war – Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, Afghanistan, Iraq and now against Islamic State.

But it is a relationship where Australia often gets ignored or forgotten.

You don’t need to be prime ministers Trunbull, or John Hunt to know that Americans can often be less knowledgeable of us than we are of them.

Similarly, despite that willingness to be side by side in battle, our sacrifice is not always appreciated in a fitting manner.

Robert MacNamara, the secretary of defense from 1961 to 1968, for example, remarked in the documentary The Fog of War that the US should have realized its cause in Vietnam was wrong because “none of our allies supported us; not Japan, not Germany, not Britain or France”.

None?

That’s a pretty sharp slap to the face of the nearly 60,000 Australian men and women who served in the Vietnam War, let alone the 521 who died.

Agree it is an uneasy cohesion policy to allow the U.S. Military stationed in your country or any other country. The U.S. gains forward staging and the various countries involved gets a forward shield. However, at times throws in the bystanding country into a conflict. Should more countries including the U.S. take the "Switzerland" approach of isolation? I served on three Aircraft Carriers as part of the Cat and Arresting Gear crew; the Battle Fleet an impressive forward staging that do not put other countries into that shield conflict. Still, including supporting land bases the best option.

"The Fog Of War" (along with "Why We Fight") is an outstanding documentary, though Australia along with other countries involved should have been mentioned. MacNamara very candid take on the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam and the Industrial Military Complex all scrutinized; really makes one think. The added topics in the Special Features of the DVD also of interest.

2018 Senate Election Chart.jpg (57.69 KiB) Viewed 576 times

[Ack]

Hell, McNamara should have known better than to make a statement like that. Australian military forces were involved so heavily in Vietnam that they had their own province for an area of operation, one where the US felt confident in the Australian military's abilities that it simply stayed out and let the Aussies handle it for themselves.

I guess McNamara didn't want to get into the failure that was SEATO, but even when the UK and France refused to help and blocked military forces, Australia still honored its commitments.

Australia was and is one of our best allies in the region. It would serve Americans to better understand this.

[marurun]

It is curious how President Obama has promised to take on the asylum seekers, or was that the arrangement before they left their country of origin? A bad situation that conflicts with the immigration 90 day hold ban which currently is being battled out by judges over here.

You might want to edit that last sentence. You make it sound like it is the judges who are challenging the president's order, instead of the affected parties. The judges are merely serving their role as legal interpreters. The stays of the order are to prevent further harm to the plaintiffs until the legal issues are resolved.

[jp1]

It is curious how President Obama has promised to take on the asylum seekers, or was that the arrangement before they left their country of origin? A bad situation that conflicts with the immigration 90 day hold ban which currently is being battled out by judges over here.

You might want to edit that last sentence. You make it sound like it is the judges who are challenging the president's order, instead of the affected parties. The judges are merely serving their role as legal interpreters. The stays of the order are to prevent further harm to the plaintiffs until the legal issues are resolved.

That process no longer has a place. Everyone just needs to fall in line under the new dictator.

[MrPopo]

He did promise to run the country like a business. And in a business the CEO gets to make proclamations and then expect everyone else to jump and implement it. A smart CEO doesn't abuse that because they'd get voted out by the board.

[CRTGAMER]

Hah! Trump's administration is failing to follow an executive order (11030, in effect since 1962) requiring all subsequent executive orders be routed through the Office of Management and Budget and then the Attorney General for review and approval. This process is non-optional unless explicitly altered or struck by another EO. There's no real punishment or anything for this, but it just goes to show how completely incapable this administration is for following proper process.

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/03/tru ... ve-orders/

Judges should not be deciding the policies of the entire nation, especially a judge in just one state! They do not have all the inside information that our leaders are privy to. Nor should the President set policy on the volatile immigration situation alone though it is in the Homeland Security Law. Congress should be involved in the immigration process as well if only it would not take so much filibustering and debate, the reason why the proclamation action is allowed. Congress needs to jump in, a decision and follow thru for the security of our nation and stopping the anarchy.

It is nuts how one judge goes one direction and another judge goes another. A Stay usually over rules an Allowance, stopping until sorted out in courts. The Seattle judge has a personal take on immigration rights through his past work with Evergreen Legal Services, a question of impartiality.

http://100percentfedup.com/liberal-fed- ... ban-video/

Two federal judges across the country from each other issued two separate and equally different decisions late Friday — one refusing to extend an injunction against President Donald Trump’s U.S. travel suspension and one blocking its effect nationwide.

First, U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, in Boston, said in a preliminary 21-page ruling that he would not extend a seven-day restraining order that has prevented the travel restrictions from being implemented this week.

A short time later on Friday, though, U.S. District Court Judge James Robart, in Seattle, upheld a challenge to Trump’s order from the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota and issued another temporary national restraining order.

The latest is the 9th district Appeal Courts will not rescind the Stay. I fall back on the rule that Judges do not make laws, but should uphold the law! Unclear which law over rules which, the leaders and courts need to resolve this quickly.

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB ... -2364.html



Act 212(b)
f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Next stop the supreme court, suspect there will be a nuclear explosion at that level.