Popular Post Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted January 30, 2017 51 minutes ago, andym said: Got to stop those 'bad dudes'... Given he was boasting in a tweet less than an hour earlier how a ban was a big part of his campaign, surely those 'bad dudes' will have already had at least 2 months notice to rush in because of him? Donald better not tell those Mexicans about the wall... 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted January 30, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted January 30, 2017 i'm not the brightest, but can someone explain this to me 'cos I'm struggling to understand the purpose of it... BREAKING: Trump to sign exec. order this morning requiring that for every 1 new regulation, 2 regulations have to be revoked - sr. official What is the point in this? Why is there a need to revoke 2 regulations when a new one comes about? I really just don't understand the logic behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 hours ago, snowychap said: Further to my post above, this is from the US embassy website: They have now taken that page down so I guess the Embassy staff are now in tune with the White House. Frankly, all a bit amateurish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, PieFacE said: i'm not the brightest, but can someone explain this to me 'cos I'm struggling to understand the purpose of it... BREAKING: Trump to sign exec. order this morning requiring that for every 1 new regulation, 2 regulations have to be revoked - sr. official What is the point in this? Why is there a need to revoke 2 regulations when a new one comes about? I really just don't understand the logic behind it. It's one of the main lines of the small government/reduced regulation agenda. Our lot over here have claimed it, too. It sounds good and it's an easy thing to point to. Whether it actually happens (or can happen) is, at best, arguable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) Enough people have bought in to the idea that regulations and 'government red tape' are a bad thing that he's somehow able to use it as a selling point. What can be bad about letting companies race to the bottom by removing already lackluster government regulation? The market will sort it all out. Kill enough employees and customers, and it's bad for business, surely that's enough incentive. Edited January 30, 2017 by Davkaus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 hours ago, snowychap said: So (if that's right) there wasn't likely to be anyone at home for Boris to talk to thus he ended up with Bannan and Trump's son-in-law. It's taken over 45 minutes for someone to ask Boris who he spoke to in the US administration (and it was a Tory asking whether it was Kushner). Boris didn't answer but did say that Rudd had spoken to her counterpart John Kelly. I think the lack of an answer clears that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Perhaps the only valid comparison between Brexit and Trump's win is the lack of planning for the unexpected result. While a social movement can have the energy and enthusiasm to overturn a stale status quo, it lacks the institutional capacity and depth to plan and staff up the bureaucracy that is subsequently required. If you think about UKIP, 5 Star in Italy, NF in France & AfD in Germany, all would face the same challenge, because they are outside of the political mainstream where 95% of professional bureaucrats operate by default. If there is a practical barrier to governance by populists that is probably it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, PieFacE said: i'm not the brightest, but can someone explain this to me 'cos I'm struggling to understand the purpose of it... BREAKING: Trump to sign exec. order this morning requiring that for every 1 new regulation, 2 regulations have to be revoked - sr. official What is the point in this? Why is there a need to revoke 2 regulations when a new one comes about? I really just don't understand the logic behind it. Well, the simple example would be those funny stories we hear every once in a while where it is illegal to drink coffee on the main street in some town (rubbish made up example), because someone insulted someone else in 1840, and they never got around to taking it off the books. This is actually a good thing! Bureaucracy only knows how to grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 30, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted January 30, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 16 minutes ago, villakram said: Well, the simple example would be those funny stories we hear every once in a while where it is illegal to drink coffee on the main street in some town (rubbish made up example), because someone insulted someone else in 1840, and they never got around to taking it off the books. This is actually a good thing! Bureaucracy only knows how to grow. He's said specifically that these are targetted at removing regulations which affect small business. I don't think I share your optimism. When businesses benefit due to reduced regulation, it's often the consumer that loses out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Well that's another campaign promise taken care of. Quote Donald Trump's first US military raid 'kills 30 civilians, including 10 women and children' 'Why kill children? This is the new [US] administration - it’s very sad, a big crime' The eight-year-old daughter of a radical preacher was among a large group of civilians reportedly killed during a US dawn raid in Yemen, the first military operation overseen by Donald Trump. Around 30 people, including 10 women and children, are thought to have been killed by American military personnel in the rural Yakla district of al-Bayda in the south of the country, according to medical staff. Nora Al-Awlaki, the daughter of lecturer and al-Qaeda sympathiser Anwar al-Awlaki who was killed in an airstrike in 2011, was one of those who lost their lives, her grandfather Nasser said. READ MORE UK investigating 'staggering Saudi human rights abuses' in Yemen Saudi-led coalition air strikes 'hit Yemen school' Over 10,000 civilians killed in Yemen conflict, UN reveals The latest casualty of Yemen's civil war? The economy “Why kill children? This is the new [US] administration - it’s very sad, a big crime,” Nasser Al-Awlaki said. “[Nora] was hit with a bullet in her neck and suffered for two hours.” The Pentagon did not refer to any civilian casualties in its statement. The US military meanwhile confirmed 14 al-Qaeda fighters had been killed in the raid, and a further two in a drone strike on central Yemen later in the day. An American commando was killed in retaliation, and three others injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Davkaus said: He's said specifically that these are targetted at removing regulations which affect small business. I don't think I share your optimism. When businesses benefit due to reduced regulation, it's often the consumer that loses out. There's no personal optimism in there. You are projecting. I was simply stating that removal of regulations is in general a good thing. Hence my very general example. Of course, with the repubs: $>people. This is low hanging populist fruit over here. The chap is a savvy political operator. Edited January 30, 2017 by villakram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Quote The operation began at dawn when a drone bombed the home of Abdulraoof al-Dhahab and then helicopters flew up and unloaded paratroopers at his house and killed everyone inside," said one anonymous resident, in an account of the incident corroborated by Yemeni security staff. If this is true, that's got to be a war crime...This isn't a drone strike gone wrong, it's boots on the ground, slaughtering civilians indiscriminately, and leaving a child to bleed out for 2 hours...I feel sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 That article doesn't note that the US killed her 16 year old (US citizen) brother a few years ago in another drone strike in Yemen. He'd gone searching for his dad shortly before he was killed, sitting round a camp fire with some of his mates. He wasn't a member of AQ at all, neither were his young friends. They were murdered on the direct instruction of Obama and Trump seems to share his predecessor's enthusiasm for such personalized killing. All together now... 'USA, USA!' 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, Davkaus said: If this is true, that's got to be a war crime...This isn't a drone strike gone wrong, it's boots on the ground, slaughtering civilians indiscriminately, and leaving a child to bleed out for 2 hours...I feel sick. They had a a gunship strafe a hospital for almost an hour and zero consequences, and this is just a "highlight" of their behavior. This shameful behavior from the empire is simply the status quo. Americans don't care as long as it doesn't come back to the mainland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 12 minutes ago, Awol said: That article doesn't note that the US killed her 16 year old (US citizen) brother a few years ago in another drone strike in Yemen. He'd gone searching for his dad shortly before he was killed, sitting round a camp fire with some of his mates. He wasn't a member of AQ at all, neither were his young friends. They were murdered on the direct instruction of Obama and Trump seems to share his predecessor's enthusiasm for such personalized killing. All together now... 'USA, USA!' I'll admit I haven't paid any attention to that story since the day it happened. I recall there were claims at the time that he was planning an attack, was that completely unfounded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 21 minutes ago, villakram said: There's no personal optimism in there. You are projecting. I was simply stating that removal of regulations is in general a good thing. Hence my very general example. Of course, with the repubs: $>people. I thought you were saying that this specific executive order culling regulations was a good thing. Because you said it. Quote This is actually a good thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 If the Yanks are getting dirty, what are the Israelis going to do? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Davkaus said: I'll admit I haven't paid any attention to that story since the day it happened. I recall there were claims at the time that he was planning an attack, was that completely unfounded? Totally unfounded. He did a bunk through his grandparents bathroom window in Sana'a to find his dad and bring him home. Youthful naivety, devotion to his father, whatever, he was a boy who loved his Dad, not a terrorist. He was also a US citizen, murdered by his government with no charge, no trial and no evidence that he was up to anything bad at all. It's a very well known incident among the tribes down there because it stands out as particularly sickening. There's a very strict tribal code and except for very rare occasions even AQ don't target women and kids. It's not the way men fight - or so they believe anyway. Edited January 30, 2017 by Awol To add context Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Awol said: Perhaps the only valid comparison between Brexit and Trump's win is the lack of planning for the unexpected result. There's also the whole "both fronted by and voted for by bigots, halfwits and simpletons" part as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts