Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Forthcoming European Disharmony............
#61
The email release that is being suppressed is very unlikely to change the election outcome ... but what I would expect when these documents are finally read and analyzed, it will drastically increase the buyers remorse inherent in the inevitable result.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#62
Now this is definitely interesting: Betting Markets Flip to Marine Le Pen in Final Hours Before Election.

Quote:Marine Le Pen jumped to a huge lead Sunday over elitist Emmanuel Macron in the betting markets.

Le Pen holds a higher number of bets that Donald Trump or Brexit did last year.

Currently Oddschecker has Marine Le Pen leading Macron 76.64% to 23.36%.

[Image: odds-checker-la-pen.jpg]

Does anyone else find this a bit unusual?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#63
(05-07-2017, 12:25 PM)John L Wrote: Does anyone else find this a bit unusual?

I don't know about unusual ... but I would expect that there a some folks that find it a bit terrifying.   S24

Keep in mind that this stuff isn't an opinion poll.  People are betting 'real' money.  

Milo Yiannopoulos is dishing the nasty dirt that would be 'illegal' in France right now.  In the grand scheme of things it doesn't strike me as all that shocking ... but who knows what else may drop.  Again, it's probably only fodder for buyers remorse.  I think the polls have closed.  NYT has Macron winning by a sizable margin on low turnout.  Euro news outlets seem to be reporting the same thing.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#64
This could be an interesting time for France, that's for sure. S5

This thing about him being a 'gay'(lord I can't stand that word) is most likely him being bisexual, going both directions.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#65
I doubt the French people could give a shit about gay or straight. They have no fundy church over there.
Reply
#66
(05-07-2017, 08:43 PM)Palladin Wrote: I doubt the French people could give a shit about gay or straight. They have no fundy church over there.

Agreed, but there was very little analysis done on this 9GB dump.  This and the drug abuse thing were from initial delving ... and nobody ... at least not the French who could properly gauge if there is much of anything scandal worthy,  delved very deeply.   Now they have a new President ... and a HUGE pile of dirt to dig through.  What could possibly go wrong?

As an example, what if the wikileaks dump on the DNC and/or the email server issue had occured AFTER HRC was elected? Do you suppose that could possibly be suppressed? And imagine if something really nasty ... say a scheduled recession or terrorist attack rivaling 911 occurred in the last few months? That's the burden that the "status quo" carries. They got their ENA graduate banker in place. Now what? If things go to sh*t ... and they find all sorts of "evidentiary material" in Macron's campaign hack ... then it will be game over in a few short years maybe quicker. If things proceed to be peachy ... probably smooth sailing ....
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#67
(05-07-2017, 08:55 PM)mr_yak Wrote:
(05-07-2017, 08:43 PM)Palladin Wrote: I doubt the French people could give a shit about gay or straight. They have no fundy church over there.

Agreed, but there was very little analysis done on this 9GB dump.  This and the drug abuse thing were from initial delving ... and nobody ... at least not the French who could properly gauge if there is much of anything scandal worthy,  delved very deeply.   Now they have a new President ... and a HUGE pile of dirt to dig through.  What could possibly go wrong?

Great point Jack! S22
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#68
(05-07-2017, 08:43 PM)Palladin Wrote: I doubt the French people could give a shit about gay or straight. They have no fundy church over there.

Agreed, but there was very little analysis done on that 9GB dump.  This and the drug abuse thing were from initial delving ... and nobody ... at least not the French who could(n't) (by law) cold properly gauge if there is much of anything scandal worthy.   Now they have a new President ... and a HUGE pile of dirt to dig through.  What could possibly go wrong?

As an example, what if the wikileaks  dump on the DNC and/or the email server scandal had occurred AFTER HRC was elected to a third Obama term?  Do you suppose that could possibly be suppressed or go un-investigated?  And imagine if something really nasty happened (beyond mere gay stuff or officiant drugs abuse)  ... say a semi-scheduled recession or terrorist attack rivaling 911 occurred in the last few months?  How would U.S. voters (retroactively) 'feel' about their choice?   That's the burden that the "status quo" carries.  The French Elites  got their ENA graduate banker in place.  Now what?  If things go to sh*t ... and they happen find all sorts of "evidentiary material" in Macron's campaign hack ... then it will be game over in a few short years ... maybe quicker.  If things proceed to be peachy ... probably smooth sailing .... what are the odds?
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#69
Now that Macron is elected, it's finaly over with all this buzz about the end of the EU, about the new era led by Le Pen, Geerts Wilders, Farrage and Putin.

We are back to reality: 2/3 of the french are still pro-EU. Poeple still trust the € as a currency and no one wants to return to monkey money.
That's what cost Le Pen her election IMO. But not only that.

Yet, the reason why I'm glad is not because he is an ultra-pro-euro but because from all the candidates he was the best for many other reasons.
The french voted smartly.

Personaly I even think that Macron is too much pro-european. He wants to make a common EU budget (on top of the existing budget?), create EU debt (so far all sovereign debts were national), make too much the EU like a single state...
I'm not as radical as him. Fortunately he is not the only one to decide about the future of the EU. He is only influencial. Germany already said no to EU debt.
He is still the president of France.

The good thing is that he thinks positively. He thinks that France can do as well as Germany with the proper policies whereas all others blame Germany for unfair practice, always blaming the others for their own failures.


JL Wrote:This thing about him being a 'gay'(lord I can't stand that word) is most likely him being bisexual, going both directions.
Palladin Wrote:I doubt the French people could give a shit about gay or straight. They have no fundy church over there.
At the NATO meeting the first legaly married gay spouse poses with first ladies (the grand mother on the left is Macron's whife):
[Image: http%3A%2F%2Fo.aolcdn.com%2Fhss%2Fstorag...37MSC.jpeg]

I wonder what the ultra-islamic Erdogan's whife may be thinking. Or maybe she doesn't know he gay and married with a man...

Belgium has a notoriousely gay minister for over 20 years. He was even minister of education at a time.
[Image: 220px-Di_Rupo_cropped.jpg]

Not everybody approves but it doesn't create any scandal, or outrage. They are still elected anyway.

About Macron, all we can say is that he denied being gay and that it's only rumors. Nobody has ever seen Macron with a man. Yet poeple tells he must be gay to stay with a woman that old.
Well, if you have homosexuals, you also have men who like old women... nothing's wrong with that.


Reply
#70
Merkel got in her nice little jab in regarding Europe "not being able to count on others" .... I'm wondering how down the French are with her new found project of Europeans "taking their fate into their hands" ... and going thorough the pain of paying for all that ... how did you put it Fred?  ... "unnecessary junk?".  It seems a little rich in that Germany pays maybe 2/3rds (as a percentage of GDP) as much as France and is now spouting poetic about about EUropean military self reliance. 

Macron sounds like he's all in ...  Le Pen on the other hand seems more like she was on board with dumping NATO ... which might be more to your liking Fred.  Funny world eh?

[Image: 20170225_WOC985_0.png]
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#71
The 2% of a nation's GNP makes the US share the greatest, because the USA GNP is so much greater than others. Greece is paid up, because 2% of zero is still zero. Paying two-thirds of the $918 billion by the US kept NATO afloat, and was far more than our 2% of GNP.

Trump's action on this was brilliant.
Reply
#72
Most of US military expenditures are not NATO in the facts, let alone for the protection of Europe.
90% of the american war efforts have been concentrated in the Middle East and the Gulf countries.
And now, the new fashion is to invest in the South Asia Pacific.
The US has shined by its absence in the Ukrainian conflict, the only but barely European conflict since the Balkan war.

Beside the anti missile system, I would be interrested to know the real cost for the US in the defense of Europe... the role NATO was created for.

The second non european NATO factor is Turkey and all the monay the US is spending there. NATO in Turkey (and Turkey in NATO) has nothing to do with the defense of Europe. It's only to serve the US wars in the oil rich countries of the M-E.

I agree Europe should spend more for defense, but comparing European spending with the entire US defense budget is not a fair analysis.
We should rather count what the US spend for forces or material in Europe, which excludes Turkey, of course.

I'm 100% to stay in NATO. France leaving NATO would have brought a big weakness in the European defense. Le Pen definetly never understood that defense should be organised at the European level. It has never been more obvious. That's why Putin is so keen to help her: Russia would be relatively much stronger should Le Pen one day dismantle everything that unite Europe.

NATO has only one big problem: Turkey. It's a recent problem but it's a big one.
Can't trust Erdogan, he suppoprted ISIS and is islamist himself. How our defense organisation can still include Tuyrkey is beyond me, but we have no choice. NATO is the only pan-european military organisation.
Reply
#73
Fred, I don't believe there is any requirement that the US keep 4% of its military stationed in Europe. To the best of my knowledge it required us to contribute a certain percentage to our military defense expenditures, but not where we keep it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#74
(05-31-2017, 06:26 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: I agree Europe should spend more for defense, but comparing European spending with the entire US defense budget is not a fair analysis.
We should rather count what the US spend for forces or material in Europe, which excludes Turkey, of course.

We're talking about NATO spending Fred, ... so let's compare ... sorry, it does not exclude Turkey ... because they pays that bill as well.

[Image: nato-spend2.jpg?itok=uMWn0Fb3]
Probably the best thing would be for Europe to assess what threats it faces and assign resources and prioritize need accordingly.  One would think that those threats would include Russia ... France faces a rather odd conundrum in that respect.  If Europe want's to divorce itself from the U.S. with regards to Defense ... or if Europe decides that we are "untrustworthy", perhaps the biggest challenge will be Air Lift capability.  And that's a fairly expensive prospect, particularly if that tall column on the end of the graph above goes away.

Obama did exactly the same chiding with regard to European contributions to NATO ... but he was much less blunt about it. Trump on the other hand actually got it on the meeting agenda. Maybe Merkel could look past our President's blowhardedness and the sting of his lack of commitment to carbon rationing? ... Maybe Macron could re-think alpha male arm-wrestling as a diplomatic strategy? Perhaps we might consider re-framing our alliance based on mutual interests and common enemies? We could do that ... or we could tell each other to pound sand as is currently happening.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#75
NATO agreements about defense budget each member has to contribute to is one thing.

Another thing is the argument presented to blame Europe for relying on the US military for its entire defense as if there would be no soldier and no weapon in Europe without the americans.

I'm OK for saying "European nations don't meet their NATO treaty obligation" but I can't admit someone saying "The US won't protect Europe anymore" because it's a myth. the US is doing much less to defend the whole Europe than it does for South Corea alone.
It's the speech content which I don't like.
Reply
#76
So then, no comment then on the fact that France must rely on Russia and Ukraine to haul it's equipment and troops around the world?

Trump hedged on commitment not because "The US won't protect Europe anymore"  but because he was attempting leverage his position to get European NATO to spend more on European defense.  Merkel in her snarky way ultimately managed to affirm that need.  Let's see if she and Macron follow through.

Again, Obama tried to make this happen for years but as a "global citizen" he had no standing. Trump in his nationalistically boorish way is finally getting some actual movement on it.  You can call that rudeness ... I'd like to think of it as results.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#77
The weird thing with Trump is, he is effectively causing the US empire major new problems with his mouth and yet his supporters, mainly rightist hawks, love him.

Contradiction in terms there. It's like he said during his campaign, "I could shoot a guy in Central Park and they'd still love me". I don't know why or how he intuited that, but, he was right.

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/trump...42068.html
Reply
#78
You are truly a glass half-empty. Did it ever strike you that when he does good things it is not reported, and when he does nothing, bad things are made up? So far, few bad things can be traced to him - only to the nay-sayers (look in the mirror) who only look for negatives. I look for both. You do not.

When he made the statement about his supporters supporting him, he was answering the media's screed against him that the media was powerful enough to politically destroy him, no matter what he did. Let me interpret: "My supporters realize the media makes up stuff. They know the Democrats make up stuff. They know the GOP 'never-Trumpers' make up stuff. They will give me the chance to explain before believing the lies." What is so hard to understand?

His mouth doesn't make half the problems that Obama's mouth made (and is still making). The real problem is the media selectively reporting pejoratively. Everything gets twisted. They shielded JFK from his own character. They turned Joe McCarthy into the epitome of e v i l, yet celebrated FDR's Fellow Travelers into sainthood. They made Nixon a tainted name, even though it was the Dems who were behind the same kind of sabotage they are doing now.

Does nobody learn from history?
Reply
#79
Palladin Wrote:... he is effectively causing the US empire major new problems ...

Trump was elected as a nationalist ... if people had really wanted another globalist, they would have elected Clinton.  The "new problems" would appear to be Europe coming to terms with the fact that it needs to spend more on it's own defense.  Your article is from the German perspective ... and sure, they are pissed about it.  Funny thing is that Merkel actually confirmed this necessity.  Here are her words ...

Quote: “The times in which we could completely depend on others are on the way out,”

Out of curiosity, do you think the U.S. should be expected to support complete European 'dependence' in perpetuity?

Fred points out that our $600 Billion defense budget doesn't all go to NATO and comparing it to Euro spending an unfair observation.  OK, ... but if our NATO 'partners' actually met the obligations that they agreed to, perhaps that $600 Billion would be less ... or maybe applied elsewhere.  Ultimately Trump asked Merkel to spend another $35 Billion ... and this is being spun as some sort of apocalyptic insult. (?)

Macron is pissed as well, but at least the French fancy themselves as a sort of global military power.  However, a least a few of Macron's legislators are rational enough to call B.S. on this when they realize that they can't get transport to and from the battle field without relying on some sketchy Russian taxi drivers.

Here's an alternate perspective, if Trump really wanted to damage NATO and the nations it serves, perhaps he'd maintain the current status in which Europe is as Merkel puts it "completely depending on others" for defense ... leaving them with poor to non-existent capabilities of their own when the bad times finally come.  I find it interesting that Poland is one of the few nations actually meeting the obligations that Merkel is chaffing about ... don't you? 
 

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#80
Yak,

Trump was elected as an anti globalist, anti free trade, nationalist. Agreed.

But, those nationalists still think the US is exceptional and should rule the globe. Very few are like me, isolationists. Very few, probably 1-2%.

There is no more central organization to our global role than NATO.

It doesn't just keep Russia and Germany tame, it helps keeps Europe peaceful, prosperous and serves as a logistics base for US global police activity. A guy from Holland nights before we invaded Iraq reported on Kamil's old website he could not sleep the entire evening due to trains full of US EQ running 24/7 on the railroads to the ports of Amsterdam.

Trump's done damage to the idea of NATO. For the first time, Europeans seriously doubt it is meaningful to the US. This little comment by Merkel is serious stuff. Trump has catalyzed European independence from American hegemony, that's not conducive to the US remaining Rome with an empire.

I like it. I don't believe in our global role.

But, most nationalists still want the USA to be the bad dog globally. No different than the globalists and supra nationalists in that respect.

That's not the way you maintain an empire, Yak. Saving a few bucks by getting them to spend more is a good idea, suggesting the USA NATO role is dependent on how much these people donate is probably not worth losing the entire system from the globalist angle though.

NATO is an incalculable benefit to the USA and to Europe.

Trump is a disaster from the old post WWII conservative viewpoint.
I can see the Paris deal decision, the Gorsuch appt as a positive from our view, but, that's it.

The alliances are harmed by his constant verbal diarrhea, his view that money decides all as if we will make war IF we're paid mercenaries to. He doesn't understand the value of NATO at all. It's worth a lot more to our role than the loss of the cheapskate European military problem and in containing Germany, I doubt it's wise for them to try and get powerful again anyway.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  1ST Carbon Legislation Test Fails:New Elections Forthcoming? John L 5 1,449 12-02-2009, 06:45 PM
Last Post: John L

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)