The Trump Presidency - Part 2

AfonsoAlves said:
@Suedesi tell me again how Russia are outproducing US + NATO in general armaments. I'd love to revisit this conversation. You never replied to my last post :(:(

EDIT - refresh your memory in case you've forgotten

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/rus...ore-discussion.468216/page-1371#post-32201673
Click to expand...

Oops, must've missed that. Happens when you’re as popular as I am here—each reply sparks hundreds of responses and private messages, so notifications get lost. Honestly, @Raoul should be paying me for boosting engagement (and raising the overall quality) on this site.

Here are some links you can peruse and digest on your own:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-navys-missile-production-problem-looks-dire-211772
https://www.wsj.com/politics/nation...ir-defense-missiles-as-demand-surges-7fc9370c
https://archive.is/N1Q9S
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/return-industrial-warfare
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/02/assessing-the-economic-value-of-military-materiel/
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publication...manys-slow-rearmament-vis-a-vis-russia-33234/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/america-s-defense-spending-is-a-nightmare/ar-AA1q02fy

The U.S. just isn’t set up to be the "arsenal of democracy" in a big, drawn-out war like what’s happening in Ukraine. Right now, we don’t have the industrial muscle to keep up a long fight—our stockpiles wouldn’t even last a few weeks of heavy combat. On top of that, we’re dealing with supply chain issues, a shortage of skilled workers, and a reliance on critical materials from places like China, which we kinda see as enemy number 1.

The reliance on flawed economic metrics can lead to dangerous complacency, leaving Western countries ill-prepared for sustained conflict. The U.S., for example, would take years to rebuild ammunition stockpiles sent to Ukraine, showing the gap between spending and actual military readiness. Further, high costs of American weaponry compared to Russian counterparts, even when adjusted for PPP, suggest that Russia gets “more bang for its buck.”

Happy reading.
 
Jericholyte2 said:


Could people enlighten me as to what this means and its implications?
Click to expand...


Mitch McConnell called for early Senate leadership elections. Two of the three candidates oppose Trump and his agenda, so Trump understandably wants someone who actually reflects the mandate he was given.
 
Suedesi said:
Oops, must've missed that. Happens when you’re as popular as I am here—each reply sparks hundreds of responses and private messages, so notifications get lost. Honestly, @Raoul should be paying me for boosting engagement (and raising the overall quality) on this site.

Here are some links you can peruse and digest on your own:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-navys-missile-production-problem-looks-dire-211772
https://www.wsj.com/politics/nation...ir-defense-missiles-as-demand-surges-7fc9370c
https://archive.is/N1Q9S
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/return-industrial-warfare
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/02/assessing-the-economic-value-of-military-materiel/
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publication...manys-slow-rearmament-vis-a-vis-russia-33234/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/america-s-defense-spending-is-a-nightmare/ar-AA1q02fy

The U.S. just isn’t set up to be the "arsenal of democracy" in a big, drawn-out war like what’s happening in Ukraine. Right now, we don’t have the industrial muscle to keep up a long fight—our stockpiles wouldn’t even last a few weeks of heavy combat. On top of that, we’re dealing with supply chain issues, a shortage of skilled workers, and a reliance on critical materials from places like China, which we kinda see as enemy number 1.

The reliance on flawed economic metrics can lead to dangerous complacency, leaving Western countries ill-prepared for sustained conflict. The U.S., for example, would take years to rebuild ammunition stockpiles sent to Ukraine, showing the gap between spending and actual military readiness. Further, high costs of American weaponry compared to Russian counterparts, even when adjusted for PPP, suggest that Russia gets “more bang for its buck.”

Happy reading.
Click to expand...

You've chosen the who's who of terrible military sources. This isn't me saying this now, I've told multiple people to NEVER get their sources from National Interest or WSJ when it comes to military matters.

The above link I gave you gave a full breakdown of every single major US weapons manufacturing rate, with a follow up to the retrospective Russian ones. I can dig out the relevant Chinese ones for you too.

If US procurement numbers are "bad" then what the hell are Russia/China's? None existent?

The bolded is insane, FY24 numbers show that all of it has already been backfilled :lol:
 
AfonsoAlves said:
You've chosen the who's who of terrible military sources. This isn't me saying this now, I've told multiple people to NEVER get their sources from National Interest or WSJ when it comes to military matters.

The above link I gave you gave a full breakdown of every single major US weapons manufacturing rate, with a follow up to the retrospective Russian ones. I can dig out the relevant Chinese ones for you too.

If US procurement numbers are "bad" then what the hell are Russia/China's? None existent?

The bolded is insane, FY24 numbers show that all of it has already been backfilled :lol:
Click to expand...

Sure, Robert Gates [who] served as secretary of defense from 2006 to 2011 for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama - is a terrible source.

We're done here.
 
Suedesi said:
Sure, Robert Gates [who] served as secretary of defense from 2006 to 2011 for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama - is a terrible source.

We're done here.
Click to expand...

The opinion of a former DEFSEC who hasn't had security clearance for 13 years to The official DOD production and manufacturing rates for every weapons platform for the year 2024, yes, it's bad.
 
Twisted_Woody said:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...w-strut-their-stuff-in-the-corridors-of-power

This is very end of the world stuff. @Raoul any thoughts? Any adults left in the room?
Click to expand...

It’s probably a touch hyperbolic but the general sentiment is pretty spot on. The main thing I take away from this election is that Trump has successfully created his own information eco system that will allow him to largely bypass traditional journalists and speak directly to people via Twitter, Truth Social, Fox, Newsmax, talk radio, and a growing battalion of Trump friendly influencers and podcasters.

These will collectively allow him to avoid the level of scrutiny typically extended to “ordinary” politicians by the legacy media. Over time, we will see this construct change peoples minds about the viability of democracy and the advantages of authoritarianism, in fact we are already seeing it now by way of several posters who actively shill on behalf of authoritarian dictatorships like Putin’s Russia.

The only thing that can stop any of this is for Dems to roar back and reclaim the Congress in two years, and then the Presidency in 28, as long as they run a strong, viable candidate.
 
Suedesi said:
Mitch McConnell called for early Senate leadership elections. Two of the three candidates oppose Trump and his agenda, so Trump understandably wants someone who actually reflects the mandate he was given.
Click to expand...
Oh fcuk you’re back!
 
Raoul said:
It’s probably a touch hyperbolic but the general sentiment is pretty spot on. The main thing I take away from this election is that Trump has successfully created his own information eco system that will allow him to largely bypass traditional journalists and speak directly to people via Twitter, Truth Social, Fox, Newsmax, talk radio, and a growing battalion of Trump friendly influencers and podcasters.

These will collectively allow him to avoid the level of scrutiny typically extended to “ordinary” politicians by the legacy media. Over time, we will see this construct change peoples minds about the viability of democracy and the advantages of authoritarianism, in fact we are already seeing it now by way of several posters who actively shill on behalf of authoritarian dictatorships like Putin’s Russia.

The only thing that can stop any of this is for Dems to roar back and reclaim the Congress in two years, and then the Presidency in 28, as long as they run a strong, viable candidate.
Click to expand...

Think the billionaires will allow it?
 
Raoul said:
It’s probably a touch hyperbolic but the general sentiment is pretty spot on. The main thing I take away from this election is that Trump has successfully created his own information eco system that will allow him to largely bypass traditional journalists and speak directly to people via Twitter, Truth Social, Fox, Newsmax, talk radio, and a growing battalion of Trump friendly influencers and podcasters.

These will collectively allow him to avoid the level of scrutiny typically extended to “ordinary” politicians by the legacy media. Over time, we will see this construct change peoples minds about the viability of democracy and the advantages of authoritarianism, in fact we are already seeing it now by way of several posters who actively shill on behalf of authoritarian dictatorships like Putin’s Russia.

The only thing that can stop any of this is for Dems to roar back and reclaim the Congress in two years, and then the Presidency in 28, as long as they run a strong, viable candidate.
Click to expand...
'traditional' news has been used by political parties for their gain since social media showed up, you talk like these news corporations never had any biases, the monopoly is broken now. Trust in these news sources is at an all time low and instead of tackling why good neo con liberals like yourself will keep losing elections.
 
2mufc0 said:
'traditional' news has been used by political parties for their gain since social media showed up, you talk like these news corporations never had any biases, the monopoly is broken now. Trust in these news sources is at an all time low and instead of tackling why good neo con liberals like yourself will keep losing elections.
Click to expand...

I'm not a neocon so please lets skip the hyperbolic pejoratives. Second, the traditional media in the US are supposed to act as the fourth estate as check on political power. That has always been the case in modern history from watergate to Trump, and has been the only way for the public to get some degree of oversight as to what politcians are doing. That construct has now been eroded in the new media landscape, which Trump is now using to advance his agenda. We saw glimmers of it with Twitter from 2016-2020, and now with the full bore rise of influencers and podcasting, are seeing it amped up to a new level.
 
Twisted_Woody said:
Think the billionaires will allow it?
Click to expand...

If what we've seen this presidential cycle is any indication, Musk, Bezos, and others are going to fall in line because they are both in competition with one another for Space contracts and won't want to rock the boat with Trump. Bezos also has to consider AWS and the US Government, so I wouldn't expect the Wapo to be too critical of Trump. Musk is also going to amplify Trump by not only prioritizing his tweets, but also amplifying Trump's own narrative himself such as what he's done on the likes of Fauci and Jack Smith. Murdoch will of course also continue to run Fox (if not his sons will). Ominous days ahead in the media space.
 
Raoul said:
I'm not a neocon so please lets skip the hyperbolic pejoratives. Second, the traditional media in the US are supposed to act as the fourth estate as check on political power. That has always been the case in modern history from watergate to Trump, and has been the only way for the public to get some degree of oversight as to what politcians are doing. That construct has now been eroded in the new media landscape, which Trump is now using to advance his agenda. We saw glimmers of it with Twitter from 2016-2020, and now with the full bore rise of influencers and podcasting, are seeing it amped up to a new level.
Click to expand...
That's certainly not how the media has been used, media corporations have turned into drivers of policy themselves, they prop up the candidate they want to see in power.

This is the same media that peddled all sorts of lies to justify the Iraq war (which you gleefully cheered on at the time, hence the neo liberal label). So much for check on political power in that case.

The younger generations don't watch news channels or read newspapers anymore. You even get with the times or become irrelevant like a lot of mainstream news organisations are becoming.
 
2mufc0 said:
That's certainly not how the media has been used, media corporations have turned into drivers of policy themselves, they prop up the candidate they want to see in power.

This is the same media that peddled all sorts of lies to justify the Iraq war (which you will all on for at the time, hence the neo liberal label). So much for check on political power in that case.

The younger generations don't watch news channels or read newspapers anymore. You even get with the times or become irrelevant like a lot of mainstream news organisations are becoming.
Click to expand...

Good points. The only area where we may disagree is that we can't in a capitalist, free market system, get around the fact that media organizations will be owned by corporations. There's simply no way to circumvent that in a democracy that has freedom of speech codified into its system. I agree on the last point. Boomers, Gen-X and the first wave of millennials probably still get a fair bit of their news from TV. The other 80% of millennials and all Gen Z rarely watch TV and are almost exclusively online. What Trump has done is devised a way to circumvent all aspects of mainstream media and journalism by using online to communicate directly with the public and thereby shield himself from any moderately mainstream forms of journalistic criticism.
 
Raoul said:
What Trump has done is devised a way to circumvent all aspects of mainstream media and journalism by using online to communicate directly with the public and thereby shield himself from any moderately mainstream forms of journalistic criticism.
Click to expand...
The Mr. Hyde to FDR’s Dr. Jeckyll
 
Redplane said:
There seems to be a certain contingent of people who move here from oppressive political environments only to then seemingly want the same thing here.
Click to expand...
It’s precisely what it is. Even people who are being actively oppressed in authoritarian countries like India, China, Vietnam, Hungary etc actively cheer for the Cheeto Mussolini, because that ‘strong man’ image is the only type of leadership they’ve been programmed to recognize. They will never acknowledge that though and just call everybody who wants a democratic government with proper checks and balances ‘sheeps’.

It’s all well and good to reckon with the fact that democratically elected leaders have often had transgressions, overreachs, or dabbled in gross criminality, but only then to turn around and say you want people who disregard all the rules just because they promise you utopia is mind bogglingly hypocritical, and stupid.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
It’s precisely what it is. Even people who are being actively oppressed in authoritarian countries like India, China, Vietnam, Hungary etc actively cheer for the Cheeto Mussolini, because that ‘strong man’ image is the only type of leadership they’ve been programmed to recognize. They will never acknowledge that though and just call everybody who wants a democratic government with proper checks and balances ‘sheeps’.

It’s all well and good to reckon with the fact that democratically elected leaders have often had transgressions, overreachs, or dabbled in gross criminality, but only then to turn around and say you want people who disregard all the rules just because they promise you utopia is mind bogglingly hypocritical, and stupid.
Click to expand...

It's absolutely mind boggling.

I was technically born in the Soviet Union and as a little kid it was a complete shitshow. I had no fond memories, some shitty dingy dark apartment with my mum and we were one of the "wealthier" ones. Why in the actual hell would anyone want that kind of governance.
 
2mufc0 said:
'traditional' news has been used by political parties for their gain since social media showed up, you talk like these news corporations never had any biases, the monopoly is broken now. Trust in these news sources is at an all time low and instead of tackling why good neo con liberals like yourself will keep losing elections.
Click to expand...
There’s a enormous difference between relying on reputed (mostly) journalists and publications for (mostly) well vetted news vs the cesspool of misinformation that is social media (twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp etc) where you can spread lies and hatred like wildfire within hours, and people believe all sorts of nonsense.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
It’s precisely what it is. Even people who are being actively oppressed in authoritarian countries like India, China, Vietnam, Hungary etc actively cheer for the Cheeto Mussolini, because that ‘strong man’ image is the only type of leadership they’ve been programmed to recognize. They will never acknowledge that though and just call everybody who wants a democratic government with proper checks and balances ‘sheeps’.

It’s all well and good to reckon with the fact that democratically elected leaders have often had transgressions, overreachs, or dabbled in gross criminality, but only then to turn around and say you want people who disregard all the rules just because they promise you utopia is mind bogglingly hypocritical, and stupid.
Click to expand...
In our case, the majority are inebriated with the authoritarian government’s bigotry and hatred machine, because they are the appeased rather than the target, and quite enjoy the targets being harmed. Hence, they are essentially fanboys who like other leaders who bring similar ideas to the table (and likely get along with our own loons too).

Hence you’ll typically find a lot of pro Israel and Trump bootlicking from Indian accounts online, as they represent teaching Muslims a lesson and RW gutter values, respectively.
 
Just read he wants to leave the climate pritection agreement again, reducde protected natural areas for oil drilling and talk Ukraine into conceding invaded regions to Russia. Man, the next years are going to be so tough from a political perspective. The polls in Germany also look terrible. Hard to stay optimistic these days.
 
Just confirmed that the department of education is going to be closed.

Seems like he is actually going with his full agenda. Quite surprised, that he hasn't endorsed Rick Scott for Majority Leader yet.
 
Revan said:
Just confirmed that the department of education is going to be closed.

Seems like he is actually going with his full agenda. Quite surprised, that he hasn't endorsed Rick Scott for Majority Leader yet.
Click to expand...
Only a matter of time on the latter now that Elon endorsed him for it. Gotta love too how Scott screams about the national deficit and the establishment putting it where it is when he *checks notes* has been very much been part of that establishment. Let's also conveniently forget the mass amounts of debt Trump s policies add/will add.
 
Redplane said:
Only a matter of time on the latter now that Elon endorsed him for it. Gotta love too how Scott screams about the national deficit and the establishment putting it where it is when he *checks notes* has been very much been part of that establishment. Let's also conveniently forget the mass amounts of debt Trump s policies add/will add.
Click to expand...
The election is in 2 days, so he would either need to endorse him now or never. However, with it being private voting, he might decide to play it safe and not endorse any candidate, despite that the preference of people who are advising Trump (Elon, Tucker Carlson etc) is clearly for Scott.

I wonder if MAGA settle for a compromise with Thune, or if they go full for Scott. If they go all in for Scott, and Thune or Cornyn win, that is not good for MAGA.

My prediction is that Thune will get it, after kissing the ring and promising the recess appointments.
 
Raoul said:
Good points. The only area where we may disagree is that we can't in a capitalist, free market system, get around the fact that media organizations will be owned by corporations. There's simply no way to circumvent that in a democracy that has freedom of speech codified into its system. I agree on the last point. Boomers, Gen-X and the first wave of millennials probably still get a fair bit of their news from TV. The other 80% of millennials and all Gen Z rarely watch TV and are almost exclusively online. What Trump has done is devised a way to circumvent all aspects of mainstream media and journalism by using online to communicate directly with the public and thereby shield himself from any moderately mainstream forms of journalistic criticism.
Click to expand...

I'm a millenials but my family 70s and above got their info and news mostly on tiktok reels (cut into WhatsApp forwards) and that contains alots of misinformation ranging fro biased news up to straight AI created hoax. They never read physical or even digital news let alone tuning in to traditional news channel

He who controls the social media controls everything nowdays
 
Revan said:
The election is in 2 days, so he would either need to endorse him now or never. However, with it being private voting, he might decide to play it safe and not endorse any candidate, despite that the preference of people who are advising Trump (Elon, Tucker Carlson etc) is clearly for Scott.

I wonder if MAGA settle for a compromise with Thune, or if they go full for Scott. If they go all in for Scott, and Thune or Cornyn win, that is not good for MAGA.

My prediction is that Thune will get it, after kissing the ring and promising the recess appointments.
Click to expand...
Thune hasn't made himself very popular in some of Trump's circles though so he d not only have to do some major ass kissing, he ll probably also be dethroned in the not too distant future. Then again, if you take a job under Trump being fired is actually a badge of honor.
 
Twisted_Woody said:
That seems....less catastrophic? Going back to @Raoul for insight....as I always do regarding US politics
Click to expand...

He was a NY congressman until a few years ago. A Trump supporter but not hardcore Maga. I don’t know anything about his climate record but in the end, it wouldn’t really matter since he will be taking policy instructions from Trump, who doesn’t care much for climate change issues, especially when they affect business interests.
 
Suedesi said:
Oops, must've missed that. Happens when you’re as popular as I am here—each reply sparks hundreds of responses and private messages, so notifications get lost. Honestly, @Raoul should be paying me for boosting engagement (and raising the overall quality) on this site.

Here are some links you can peruse and digest on your own:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-navys-missile-production-problem-looks-dire-211772
https://www.wsj.com/politics/nation...ir-defense-missiles-as-demand-surges-7fc9370c
https://archive.is/N1Q9S
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/return-industrial-warfare
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/02/assessing-the-economic-value-of-military-materiel/
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publication...manys-slow-rearmament-vis-a-vis-russia-33234/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/america-s-defense-spending-is-a-nightmare/ar-AA1q02fy

The U.S. just isn’t set up to be the "arsenal of democracy" in a big, drawn-out war like what’s happening in Ukraine. Right now, we don’t have the industrial muscle to keep up a long fight—our stockpiles wouldn’t even last a few weeks of heavy combat. On top of that, we’re dealing with supply chain issues, a shortage of skilled workers, and a reliance on critical materials from places like China, which we kinda see as enemy number 1.

The reliance on flawed economic metrics can lead to dangerous complacency, leaving Western countries ill-prepared for sustained conflict. The U.S., for example, would take years to rebuild ammunition stockpiles sent to Ukraine, showing the gap between spending and actual military readiness. Further, high costs of American weaponry compared to Russian counterparts, even when adjusted for PPP, suggest that Russia gets “more bang for its buck.”

Happy reading.
Click to expand...

The US has enough firepower to stand toe to toe against every nation in the world, or two at a stretch if necessary. Discounting nuke and allies

They're the strongest nation in the world x3

Russia have calculated the US won't interfere and they're correct in their assessment. If the US go all out Russia would be finished pretty soon. Ugly yes, no long-term solution maybe, but there's no doubt who'd come out winning.

The US are embroiled in Afghanistan and Iraq for so long it's not due to their inability or the stupidity of their war strategist, but due to the politics and Corruptions behind the prolonged war. For some, war means money to be made, the longer the war the greater the money.
 
So, he picks one of the most obvious Neocons around for that position.

Okay then.
 
Morty_ said:
So, he picks one of the most obvious Neocons around for that position.

Okay then.
Click to expand...

Rubio has changed a lot of his views since the summer to orient himself closer to Trump in the lead up to the VP selection. He of course still holds his old views about protecting Ukraine but has been playing nice in the hopes he may get SecState
 
Raoul said:
Click to expand...


Mike Waltz is not a NATO skeptic.

He was the guest speaker at the Atlantic Council (an incredibly pro-nato, pro Atlanticist think tank) just last week, reiterating the importance of NATO but also clarifying that NATO nations MUST contribute to the 2% GDP share.
 
AfonsoAlves said:
Mike Waltz is not a NATO skeptic.

He was the guest speaker at the Atlantic Council (an incredibly pro-nato, pro Atlanticist think tank) just last week, reiterating the importance of NATO but also clarifying that NATO nations MUST contribute to the 2% GDP share.
Click to expand...

Yeah, not sure where they got that. Maybe he’s been doing what Rubio has lately- speaking tougher on NATO and Ukraine to charm Trump into an administration job
 
You must log in or register to reply here.